Erik Pears contract details

[Coach Sal]

From Mark Gaughan of the Buffalo News.....


Pears deal worth $9.3 million

The deal signed by Bills right tackle Erik Pears is worth a total of $9.3 million over the next three years, The News has learned. The extension keeps Pears in the fold through 2014. Pears will get $3.85 million guaranteed in the contract.

"I feel great," Pears said after practice today. "I’ve enjoyed my time here and I’m happy to be here for three more years, I couldn’t be more excited. ... I can’t thank the organization enough for giving me a real opportunity to get in there and show them what I could do. I feel I really took advantage of the offseason and came in prepared to do the job."

http://blogs.buffalonews.com/billboard/2011/12/pears-deal-worth-93-million.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fbuffalonews%2Fbillboard+%28BillBoard%29

[jimbohastle51]

That is such a great deal for the Bills for a starting RT!

[clumping platelets]

Some of that is undoubtedly on the 2011 cap. Wish they would break it down more :sadwalk:

[mysticsoto]

Very good deal. And if you were to add this past year into the mix...we'll have him for 4 yrs at a total $10 Mil. And Op is *****ing about that??? As many of us always say, some people ***** just to *****...

[tampabay25690]

Awesome deal.
Glad he wants to be here and he has been a very nice addition to the OL..

[Johnny Bugmenot]

That's backup money. I'm thinking they will be in the market for a replacement next year...

[Albany,n.y.]

That's backup money. I'm thinking they will be in the market for a replacement next year...
That's not backup money for Ralph & the Bills-See Hangartner. If Pears goes to the bench once there is no more guaranteed $, he goes to the street.

[better days]

That's not backup money for Ralph & the Bills-See Hangartner. If Pears goes to the bench once there is no more guaranteed $, he goes to the street.

Well, if Pears goes to the bench, I think he would be a much better backup than Hangartner would have been at his salary. Hangartner is a smart guy, but he is just not big or strong enough to play in the AFC East against guys like Wilfork & Pouha IMO.

[ServoBillieves]

Great deal, good player, interesting situation.

I'm still a little confused as to why people are saying he's a backup when he's played as good or better than each player on our offensive line this season?

Thanks Coach, have been interested in the details since starting the thread the other day.

[Buddo]

Well, if Pears goes to the bench, I think he would be a much better backup than Hangartner would have been at his salary. Hangartner is a smart guy, but he is just not big or strong enough to play in the AFC East against guys like Wilfork & Pouha IMO.

While that is probably true, I still believe we would have been much better off retaining Hangman - at least for this year.

I think Pears is a good signing, and will actually probably improve somewhat, as he knows where he is, and what he's going to be doing. While his play may have dropped off a little recently (whose hasn't?), he was undoubtedly one of our better linemen, early on in the season.
I like what he brings to the group as a whole tbh, as he also has experience at LT if push came to shove and someone went down.
I think the comments from the coaches about him, that he plays the down as he's supposed to, make a lot of difference in how he should be viewed. If all of the O-Line did that every play, they would be considerably better as an entity.

[DesertFox24]

That's backup money. I'm thinking they will be in the market for a replacement next year...

No that is not backup RT money.

Not many teams pay backups more than 1 million either.

[Johnny Bugmenot]

No that is not backup RT money.

Not many teams pay backups more than 1 million either.
They will once they have to start spending to the cap. But if this is starter money, they ought to be flogged. This team needs improvement, and if you only pay your RT $3M a year, that doesn't show a lot of value.

[mysticsoto]

They will once they have to start spending to the cap. But if this is starter money, they ought to be flogged. This team needs improvement, and if you only pay your RT $3M a year, that doesn't show a lot of value.

That doesn't make any sense. If Pears is fine with his contract, then how does that NOT show good value? His play WAY exceeded his contract this year and they rewarded him w/a 3 yr contract for it. If he's happy, that's all that matters. Maybe he's not a greedy person who values money above anything else. And that leaves the Bills more money to spend elsewhere - we need serious help on defense...

[Bill Cody]

They will once they have to start spending to the cap. But if this is starter money, they ought to be flogged. This team needs improvement, and if you only pay your RT $3M a year, that doesn't show a lot of value.

So if they paid him more he'd be a better value?:scratch:

[jimbohastle51]

The report is 3.85 mil is guaranteed. i would think that the guaranteed money was paid in the form of a signing bonus this season because of our cap flex ability. if this is the case he cap hit the next 3 years will be pennies compared to other starting RT's in this league.

[PromoTheRobot]

You are 20-something and someone gives you $3.85M. Sock it away for 20 years, double it to $7.7M and earn almost $200K a year just off the interest. I can live on $200K/yr.

PTR

[TigerJ]

That's not backup money for Ralph & the Bills-See Hangartner. If Pears goes to the bench once there is no more guaranteed $, he goes to the street.I'm not into capology and all that stuff, but it seems that a deal like this leaves Buffalo with all the options they need. If they want to keep Pears as a starter, they can do it at a very reasonable price. If they end up re-signing Bell, who played well last week, or acquiring another starting caliber tackle they can keep Pears as a backup, or dump him with little penalty.

[BillsFever21]

That's a fair contract and I even stated yesterday I'd give him around 4 million a year at the most.

He's not good but he's not bad. He's average and gives us a stable body at RT for now at a low price and it's one less position of need we have to try and fill. If he ends up playing below average then only 3.8 million of it is guaranteed and we can dispose of him after next season.

I'm shocked the Bills actually got a fair contract for re-signing someone. Usually they overpay for them like in the case of Kelsay which they did TWICE. I guess they didn't learn the first time with him.

[djjimkelly]

see people curse what has buddy nix done in FA this counts to me!!!

i think buddy is doing a great job

now find us 2 wrs that can get some separation and 2 olbs that can pressure the qb

[Fixxxer]

see people curse what has buddy nix done in FA this counts to me!!!

i think buddy is doing a great job

now find us 2 wrs that can get some separation and 2 olbs that can pressure the qb

So far he's been doing a fine job. Lots of things still to be done, I see people crying over the move they didn't make regarding Steve Johnson but the year has not ended, maybe now they're focusing on Steve, Bell or Bryan Scott.

When the year ends I hope him and Gailey make a fair evaluation not only of his roster but the coaching staff too.

[DraftBoy]

Good deal, doesn't lock us into too much and he gets paid well for a guy I think they'll eventually move to a swing tackle role.

[OpIv37]

Very good deal. And if you were to add this past year into the mix...we'll have him for 4 yrs at a total $10 Mil. And Op is *****ing about that??? As many of us always say, some people ***** just to *****...

Not *****ing about the cost of the deal.

I'm *****ing about the quality of the player. You can't do the same thing over and over again and expect different results. We already locked up Fitz, re-signed Pears, talking about re-signing Stevie.... This group has proven that they can't win, and with the Pears signing, the FO has their built-in excuse to not address the OL further during the off-season.

Every guy from this current pile of crap team that gets extended or re-signed reduces the chances that we will improve talent-wise going into next season.

[Bill Cody]

Every guy from this current pile of crap team that gets extended or re-signed reduces the chances that we will improve talent-wise going into next season.

So false. 1) no team has all stars at every position 2) you can't replace 45 guys in a year so what you're saying is impractical 3) the way to actually build a winner in Buffalo is pretty simple and it has to be done in stages over several years a) add impact players b) build depth

You don't need impact players at every position to win, not even close. We added Dareus last year. We need another impact player or 2 on D and one or 2 on O. And we need to continue to churn the bottom of the roster. Pears signing does not impact in any way shape or form our ability to do either of those things.

[OpIv37]

So false. 1) no team has all stars at every position 2) you can't replace 45 guys in a year so what you're saying is impractical 3) the way to actually build a winner in Buffalo is pretty simple and it has to be done in stages over several years a) add impact players b) build depth

You don't need impact players at every position to win, not even close. We added Dareus last year. We need another impact player or 2 on D and one or 2 on O. And we need to continue to churn the bottom of the roster. Pears signing does not impact in any way shape or form our ability to do either of those things.

1. It's not about not having stars at EVERY position. It's about not having stars at ANY position. Outside of Fred Jackson and maybe Kyle Williams, that's where we're at.

2. No, you can't replace 45 guys but you have to start somewhere and we're not doing that.

3. Yeah, in stages over several years- unfortunately, Chan and Nix have been here for nearly 2 full years and we are still at the same stage we were at when they got here. They are continuing the tradition of dooming us to perpetual rebuilding.

We need far more than 2 impact players on D. We need to churn the top of the roster, not the bottom of the roster. Yes, we do have problems with depth, but depth means little if your starters can't get the job done when healthy.

And the Pears signing DOES impact those things because a) Ralph is cheap and will only spend so much money, and b) along with the injuries, it gives the FO an excuse to not further address the OL in the off-season. I can hear the press conference now: "Well, we locked up Pears and he played pretty well for us, and when our OL is healthy, we feel the guys we have can do a good job." Uggh.

You are right in that it TECHNICALLY does not hurt our ability to add players, but with the reality of the way this FO does business, it does affect our ability to improve in the off-season.

[Bill Cody]

1. It's not about not having stars at EVERY position. It's about not having stars at ANY position. Outside of Fred Jackson and maybe Kyle Williams, that's where we're at.

2. No, you can't replace 45 guys but you have to start somewhere and we're not doing that.

3. Yeah, in stages over several years- unfortunately, Chan and Nix have been here for nearly 2 full years and we are still at the same stage we were at when they got here. They are continuing the tradition of dooming us to perpetual rebuilding.

We need far more than 2 impact players on D. We need to churn the top of the roster, not the bottom of the roster. Yes, we do have problems with depth, but depth means little if your starters can't get the job done when healthy.

And the Pears signing DOES impact those things because a) Ralph is cheap and will only spend so much money, and b) along with the injuries, it gives the FO an excuse to not further address the OL in the off-season. I can hear the press conference now: "Well, we locked up Pears and he played pretty well for us, and when our OL is healthy, we feel the guys we have can do a good job." Uggh.

You are right in that it TECHNICALLY does not hurt our ability to add players, but with the reality of the way this FO does business, it does affect our ability to improve in the off-season.

no

[OpIv37]

no

lmao. Quality, well-reasoned response.

[Bill Cody]

lmao. Quality, well-reasoned response.

yours was equally non responsive IMO. When you resort to "you're technically right but that's not how the Bills do things" it's time to stop wasting each others time.

[Goobylal]

1. It's not about not having stars at EVERY position. It's about not having stars at ANY position. Outside of Fred Jackson and maybe Kyle Williams, that's where we're at.
Few teams have more than a couple stars.

[SABURZFAN]

can't complain about that deal.

[Johnny Bugmenot]

So if they paid him more he'd be a better value?:scratch:
Swap the two. If they thought he was valuable, they'd have paid him-- or a higher marquee RT-- more. Instead, they're paying a supposed starter backup wages because they know that's all he's capable of being in the long term.

[Philagape]

Op, should they have not re-signed Pears, and let him walk?

If so, then should they spend $4-5 mil a year on a right tackle? (assuming one worth that much is available)

If so, what positions should be left dirt cheap? Because it's impossible to spend that much at every position, not to mention more for certain positions.

[BillsFever21]

see people curse what has buddy nix done in FA this counts to me!!!

i think buddy is doing a great job

now find us 2 wrs that can get some separation and 2 olbs that can pressure the qb

How can you seriously think he has done a great job so far? I can see being optimistic and feeling he's done an alright job but the jury is definitely still out on him and Gailey.

This is their 2nd season and the team isn't any better then they were when they took over. If anything they are worse if you are judging the team by wins then the Brandon/Levy and Jauron era after their first two seasons. And don't use the excuse that the team was in a mess that they are trying to get out off because the team was in just as much of a mess when Brandon/Levy and Jauron took over too.

The draft last season looks to be useless to average at best as of right now. We haven't gotten anything out of that draft class and outside of Spiller it's looking like the rest of them will be average starters or depth or role players at best. It was a horrible decision to draft Spiller with our 1st round pick last year and how he progresses will be the determining factor if we get anything as far as a talented starter goes out of the entire draft.

It's still too early to tell with this years draft class. Williams showed a little bit of flashes in a couple games this season when he was healthy but that's about it. Dareus has been alright as a rookie but hasn't made a huge impact. It still remains to be seen whether he turns out to be a Pro Bowl type starter or just a 2nd tier starter. Unless he turns out to be a 1st tier Pro Bowl level player then that will be a bust considering where he was drafted and also being the first DL chosen in the draft.

Sheppard hasn't really shown a ton and Searcy hasn't played enough to form an opinion on yet but he didn't make an impact in the couple games he started for Wilson while he was injured. His status also remains to be seen.

As far as FA's go he hasn't signed any steals in free agency. We have an average but stable RT in Pears that he found on his watch and a decent but aging ILB in Barnett but that's about it. As far as anybody on the right side of 30 who will give us many good years he hasn't signed anybody great players of value in that category.

Not to mention he also jumped the gun and grossly overpaid a journeyman starter throughout his career in Fitzpatrick after only having 3 good games this season and an average season at best last year. He signed a QB who has a current record of 9-18 as a Bill and two straight seasons of at least a 6 game losing streak(not counting the first two games Edwards lost to start 2010) to a contract worth an average of 10 million a year with 24 million in guaranteed money.

He was worth keeping around for at least a couple more years as our starter while we groomed a young replacement to take his place and/or compete with him or if he ended up working out being our starter for several more years but he overreacted and instead of waiting it out he bumbled the signing and ended up paying him probably 30% more give or take then he could have gotten him for.

The Merriman signing didn't end up working out. The guy is a shadow of his former self and he proved once again he can't stay healthy. I'll give him a pass on him though since it was worth the shot and there wasn't much guaranteed money outside of this season.

If you were to grade the Nix and Gailey era as of right now based off the status listed above you would have to give him C- or D+. You have to county Gailey in the mix because he is the one who hired him and makes the coaching personnel decisions.

I don't see how you could give them anymore then a C at the very best and that's being generous. In their two seasons we have an 8 game losing streak and a 6 game losing streak and counting. And after pissing away a 3-0/4-1/5-2 start in the process that is a complete failure. How you can say he is doing a great job with 9 total wins in two season which if we're lucky will end up as 10 is just being unrealistic and looking at the team through rose colored glasses like many fans of every team does.

We all eventually hated the Brandon/Levy and Jauron era and realized how horrible of a GM/HC they were but even they had more success their first two seasons and at least Jauron had more success as a HC then Gailey and many people thought Levy was going to be our answer. Of course it took longer for some to realize it then others but you will have that. Most likely many of them are probably the same people who are thinking the Nix/Gailey combination has done a good job so far.

The Levy/Brandon and Jauron era went 7-9 their first two season in Buffalo and many thought we were on the cusp of a playoff team and were only a couple good players and drafts away. It wasn't until after our 4-0 start in 2008 and the collapse that followed before the general consensus was that we had a lousy GM an coach running the team and the following season Brandon and Jauron were removed of their positions and rightfully so.

Our best young players or overall best players on the team in Wood, Jackson, Levitre, Johnson and Byrd were all brought in under the previous administration. The Nix/Gailey era has yet to produce any good players although that can change depending on how Spiller and Dareus turns out and if we can get anything of credible value out of our other 1st and 2nd year players.

If Dareus and Spiller doesn't end up being great players then our first two drafts have been a total waste. Then even if Spiller ends up being a good every down back it was still a bad selection with the many other needs we had and the other good players still on the board and with Jackson and Lynch already on the team. Even though their plans were to trade Lynch after that we still didn't need to draft a RB with the #9 pick in the draft when we already had Jackson who had proven he was a reliable starter and was also under contract for 3 more years after that. We could have picked up either an average veteran RB in FA to compete with and compliment Jackson or drafted one in the 3rd round or so. Especially since Spiller only touched the ball 98 times last year and only 90 times so far this year and if Jackson wouldn't have gotten injured he only would've touched the ball around 90 times give or take this season. We totally screwed the pooch on that draft pick unless Spiller ends up as the next Marshall Faulk type of player in the long-term with our team.

[djjimkelly]

i agree i hated the spiller pick and thought we should have went a different direction with that pick.

but i can see why spiller was picked jackson is as good as done here and i can see spiller taking and running with the job from here on out

i like the dwan edwards pickup the dareus pick is genius

barnett is a great signing pears is a solid enough starter and i agree with draftboy he is our swing tackle at worst in a pinch

the roster is in transition be patient the cupboard was near empty when buddy took over

we have half a team at this point

now if he doesnt address OLB and wr this offseason ill be cursing with you but for the most part hes done the best with what he has to work with.

[mysticsoto]

Not *****ing about the cost of the deal.

I'm *****ing about the quality of the player. You can't do the same thing over and over again and expect different results. We already locked up Fitz, re-signed Pears, talking about re-signing Stevie.... This group has proven that they can't win, and with the Pears signing, the FO has their built-in excuse to not address the OL further during the off-season.

Every guy from this current pile of crap team that gets extended or re-signed reduces the chances that we will improve talent-wise going into next season.

Add a quality OLB or two that can rush the passer, and maybe a semi-decent CB (although the rookies appear to be ready to step up) and some better depth on the Oline (for when injuries hit) and this team will actually move somewhere next year. With Kyle returning, a decent pass rush will do wonders and removing Spencer and Carrington from playing positions they shouldn't be playing will help a great deal also.

Even w/a crappy defense, we were playing decently the 1st half of the season until injuries got the best of us. My only concern is Fitzpatrick and why his play has changed.

But once again, signing Pears is a good move and changes nothing of the immediate problems listed above. As I've said before, Pears is not the problem, and no, he's not a probowl player, but he's not a problem and it doesn't make sense to make a hole at RT unless you've addressed all the other higher priority holes first.

And once again, I'll ask you...do you have a plan for that? Or will you respond with your usual, "I don't make plans...that's the FO's job - but I can unrealistically call for all sorts of changes without a plan to account for those changes" ???

[OpIv37]

yours was equally non responsive IMO. When you resort to "you're technically right but that's not how the Bills do things" it's time to stop wasting each others time.

lmao.

Just because the option is technically available does not mean the Bills will take it.

We've both seen how this franchise operates, and if you are willing to dismiss my post that easily, obviously you haven't been paying attention.

[OpIv37]

Add a quality OLB or two that can rush the passer, and maybe a semi-decent CB (although the rookies appear to be ready to step up) and some better depth on the Oline (for when injuries hit) and this team will actually move somewhere next year. With Kyle returning, a decent pass rush will do wonders and removing Spencer and Carrington from playing positions they shouldn't be playing will help a great deal also.

Even w/a crappy defense, we were playing decently the 1st half of the season until injuries got the best of us. My only concern is Fitzpatrick and why his play has changed.

But once again, signing Pears is a good move and changes nothing of the immediate problems listed above. As I've said before, Pears is not the problem, and no, he's not a probowl player, but he's not a problem and it doesn't make sense to make a hole at RT unless you've addressed all the other higher priority holes first.

And once again, I'll ask you...do you have a plan for that? Or will you respond with your usual, "I don't make plans...that's the FO's job - but I can unrealistically call for all sorts of changes without a plan to account for those changes" ???

You don't think Pears is a problem? Did you watch the game on Sunday? He got owned by Cameron Wake- a guy that he will have to play against twice a season. In the first quarter alone, he gave up a sack and had two penalties.

You can say I lack a plan or want unrealistic changes and you may be right. But this is realistic: We are not going to win with guys like Erik Pears and Stevie Johnson and Ryan Fitzpatrick. How do I know? Because we have those guys NOW and we suck.

So, either the FO figures out a plan, or we keep losing. If there's no realistic plan, we keep losing. It's that simple. You can't do the same thing and expect different results.

[mysticsoto]

You don't think Pears is a problem? Did you watch the game on Sunday? He got owned by Cameron Wake- a guy that he will have to play against twice a season. In the first quarter alone, he gave up a sack and had two penalties.

You can say I lack a plan or want unrealistic changes and you may be right. But this is realistic: We are not going to win with guys like Erik Pears and Stevie Johnson and Ryan Fitzpatrick. How do I know? Because we have those guys NOW and we suck.

So, either the FO figures out a plan, or we keep losing. If there's no realistic plan, we keep losing. It's that simple. You can't do the same thing and expect different results.
Nobody is saying "let's do the same thing". But you also can't expect to overhaul the entire team every year and get any results. Next year you'll be saying the same thing - "dump everybody" and sooner or later we'll have rookies and nobody FAs that can't play. You want to dump someone? Tell me who is better and that is realistic in bringing in here and that would want to come to Buffalo and that would play for what Pears is playing. It's not Fantasy Football. You don't just get to click on a button and change one of your players just like that.

The Patriots have had crummy RBs for years. They have a crappy defense this year too. Yet they find ways to win b'cse they have key people performing in other areas of their team. Baltimore won a superbowl years ago with a mediocre (at best) offense.

People keep telling you that you can't have probowl players at every position, but that still doesn't penetrate your thick head.

Pears didn't have his best game this past Sunday. Neither did anybody else except Spiller - so I'm not going to finger point to him only. There have been plenty of other games that he's been decent - or are you going to ignore those b'cse it doesn't fit your point?

[better days]

You don't think Pears is a problem? Did you watch the game on Sunday? He got owned by Cameron Wake- a guy that he will have to play against twice a season. In the first quarter alone, he gave up a sack and had two penalties.

You can say I lack a plan or want unrealistic changes and you may be right. But this is realistic: We are not going to win with guys like Erik Pears and Stevie Johnson and Ryan Fitzpatrick. How do I know? Because we have those guys NOW and we suck.

So, either the FO figures out a plan, or we keep losing. If there's no realistic plan, we keep losing. It's that simple. You can't do the same thing and expect different results.

Well, before the injuries hit the Bills HARD, the team was WINNING with those guys.

[OpIv37]

Nobody is saying "let's do the same thing". But you also can't expect to overhaul the entire team every year and get any results. Next year you'll be saying the same thing - "dump everybody" and sooner or later we'll have rookies and nobody FAs that can't play. You want to dump someone? Tell me who is better and that is realistic in bringing in here and that would want to come to Buffalo and that would play for what Pears is playing. It's not Fantasy Football. You don't just get to click on a button and change one of your players just like that.

The Patriots have had crummy RBs for years. They have a crappy defense this year too. Yet they find ways to win b'cse they have key people performing in other areas of their team. Baltimore won a superbowl years ago with a mediocre (at best) offense.

People keep telling you that you can't have probowl players at every position, but that still doesn't penetrate your thick head.

Pears didn't have his best game this past Sunday. Neither did anybody else except Spiller - so I'm not going to finger point to him only. There have been plenty of other games that he's been decent - or are you going to ignore those b'cse it doesn't fit your point?

And I keep telling people that we can't get by without Pro Bowlers at ANY position like we've been trying to do, but that won't penetrate your thick heads.

Pears has been decent to bad. I'm not willing to ignore bad because he has been decent at times. That's just stupid.

We are not going to win with the guys we have and we are not going to win without any stars. So, go ahead and defend the status quo- just don't be surprised when the losing continues ad nauseum.

[OpIv37]

Well, before the injuries hit the Bills HARD, the team was WINNING with those guys.

Then they lost games because Fitzpatrick forgot how to throw, Stevie couldn't make the catches when it counted most and Pears decided to be Cameron Wake's *****.

[better days]

And I keep telling people that we can't get by without Pro Bowlers at ANY position like we've been trying to do, but that won't penetrate your thick heads.

Pears has been decent to bad. I'm not willing to ignore bad because he has been decent at times. That's just stupid.

We are not going to win with the guys we have and we are not going to win without any stars. So, go ahead and defend the status quo- just don't be surprised when the losing continues ad nauseum.

NOBODY is supporting status quo. People are supporting keeping decent players at reasonable contracts rather than creating just another hole to fill.

If the Bills can land a better player than Pears GREAT, then Pears becomes a GOOD backup.

The point is they can use a high rnd draft pick on an OLB which is much more needed than a RT because they have Pears.

Who sucks more in your opinion Op, Pears or the Bills OLBs?

[OpIv37]

NOBODY is supporting status quo. People are supporting keeping decent players at reasonable contracts rather than creating just another hole to fill.

If the Bills can land a better player than Pears GREAT, then Pears becomes a GOOD backup.

The point is they can use a high rnd draft pick on an OLB which is much more needed than a RT because they have Pears.

Who sucks more in your opinion Op, Pears or the Bills OLBs?

Except that's not how the Bills work. The Bills paid Pears, therefore they are done with RT and most likely done with the OL overall. The injuries and paying Pears give them all the excuses they need to not do anything else.

As far as your question regarding the OLB's: First, you are trying to create a false dichotomy. The Bills should NOT have to choose between keeping Pears and upgrading OLB. They have the cap space to do both. There is no reason we should have to settle for mediocrity at RT because we suck at OLB.

Second, signing Pears does not mean the Bills' FO will attempt to address OLB, and if they do make the attempt, it does not guarantee their success. If you had told me that keeping Pears means a GUARANTEED improvement at OLB, then I'd be far less critical. I wouldn't be thrilled, but I would be willing to make the compromise. But the reality is that signing Pears at RT creates a potential opportunity to address OLB through the draft or FA since we don't have to address RT, but it doesn't guarantee that we'll make the attempt and it certainly doesn't guarantee success if an attempt is made.

[mysticsoto]

And I keep telling people that we can't get by without Pro Bowlers at ANY position like we've been trying to do, but that won't penetrate your thick heads.

Pears has been decent to bad. I'm not willing to ignore bad because he has been decent at times. That's just stupid.

We are not going to win with the guys we have and we are not going to win without any stars. So, go ahead and defend the status quo- just don't be surprised when the losing continues ad nauseum.

Would a probowler at RT fix the team's issues? Or is it more important to fix OLBs (both sides), CB and possibly QB/WR and get better depth on the Oline? You can't create a new hole and not expect it to impact the ability to address another position...

[OpIv37]

Would a probowler at RT fix the team's issues? Or is it more important to fix OLBs (both sides), CB and possibly QB/WR and get better depth on the Oline? You can't create a new hole and not expect it to impact the ability to address another position...

See my post above. You can't sign a mediocre player and claim it's not a hole just cuz you signed a body.

[better days]

Except that's not how the Bills work. The Bills paid Pears, therefore they are done with RT and most likely done with the OL overall. The injuries and paying Pears give them all the excuses they need to not do anything else.

As far as your question regarding the OLB's: First, you are trying to create a false dichotomy. The Bills should NOT have to choose between keeping Pears and upgrading OLB. They have the cap space to do both. There is no reason we should have to settle for mediocrity at RT because we suck at OLB.

Second, signing Pears does not mean the Bills' FO will attempt to address OLB, and if they do make the attempt, it does not guarantee their success. If you had told me that keeping Pears means a GUARANTEED improvement at OLB, then I'd be far less critical. I wouldn't be thrilled, but I would be willing to make the compromise. But the reality is that signing Pears at RT creates a potential opportunity to address OLB through the draft or FA since we don't have to address RT, but it doesn't guarantee that we'll make the attempt and it certainly doesn't guarantee success if an attempt is made.

Well, I know I don't have to tell you the Bills will not pay a high priced FA to come to Buffalo for ANY position.

They only have so many draft picks.

Therefore the choice becomes use a high draft pick on a RT if they let Pears go, or keep Pears & use a high pick on OLB.

Looks like an easy choice to me. I like the chances of finding a decent OL player in the 4th rnd or later much more than a decent OLB.

Starting in 2013 the Bills will have to start spending more money, but I don't expect them to until they HAVE to.

[OpIv37]

Well, I know I don't have to tell you the Bills will not pay a high priced FA to come to Buffalo for ANY position.

They only have so many draft picks.

Therefore the choice becomes use a high draft pick on a RT if they let Pears go, or keep Pears & use a high pick on OLB.



And now we are at the root of the problem with this team.

They won't act in FA, so we are forced to rely on guys like Stevie and Fitz and Pears because we only have so many draft picks and have larger holes to fill. And I don't have to tell you what the results are....

[mysticsoto]

See my post above. You can't sign a mediocre player and claim it's not a hole just cuz you signed a body.

Yes I can b'cse you have made some assumptions that a) there is a better RT available b) that he'd be willing to come here and c) that he'd be atleast reasonably priced (anything higher impacts other positions that need to be filled).

So you don't have any plan, but you've automatically made the assumptions above...

[OpIv37]

Yes I can b'cse you have made some assumptions that a) there is a better RT available b) that he'd be willing to come here and c) that he'd be atleast reasonably priced (anything higher impacts other positions that need to be filled).

So you don't have any plan, but you've automatically made the assumptions above...

The only assumption I've made is that Pears is mediocre and we can do better.

It is the FO's job to put a quality team on the field. They need to find answers to those questions. I wonder how all of our opponents always manage to answer those questions and improve in the off-season, but we never can. There is always a litany of excuses for the Bills.

And honestly, when we are sitting at $20 million below the cap (probably a little less now because of some of the signings), not being "reasonably" priced doesn't affect other positions NEARLY as much as you are making it sound. Or, at least it shouldn't. With this team, it most likely will. It just frustrates me when fans give credit for getting players at "reasonable" prices when the team NEVER turns around and uses that extra cap space to make the team better. It just goes right into the old man's pocket.

[better days]

And now we are at the root of the problem with this team.

They won't act in FA, so we are forced to rely on guys like Stevie and Fitz and Pears because we only have so many draft picks and have larger holes to fill. And I don't have to tell you what the results are....

OK so we both know how the team is being run. I think the Bills have a better chance to improve by keeping Pears & using a high draft pick on an OLB.

Aside from the draft, the Bills only hope of getting better players is to sign good players that were injured like Barnett or in somebodys trash heap like Pears.

Both the Redskins & Eagles have proven that throwing a lot of money at FAs is no guarantee for success either.

[mysticsoto]

The only assumption I've made is that Pears is mediocre and we can do better.

We can do better at every position if your are just taking it outside the context of the real world. Again...what's the plan? Who is better? Are they willing to come here? How much would it take? Would high pay for a RT affect the mindset of the other Olinemen and our LTs? How much is the max you are willing to spend? Or would you prefer to go the draft route? If so, who are you targeting? What round? What's the backup plan if they are taken?

There's no answers from you...just generic "we can do better" answers...




It is the FO's job to put a quality team on the field. They need to find answers to those questions. I wonder how all of our opponents always manage to answer those questions and improve in the off-season, but we never can. There is always a litany of excuses for the Bills.

And honestly, when we are sitting at $20 million below the cap (probably a little less now because of some of the signings), not being "reasonably" priced doesn't affect other positions NEARLY as much as you are making it sound. Or, at least it shouldn't. With this team, it most likely will. It just frustrates me when fans give credit for getting players at "reasonable" prices when the team NEVER turns around and uses that extra cap space to make the team better. It just goes right into the old man's pocket.

The money issue is indeed a legitimate beef. But that's not my point or what I'm addressing.

[OpIv37]

OK so we both know how the team is being run. I think the Bills have a better chance to improve by keeping Pears & using a high draft pick on an OLB.

Aside from the draft, the Bills only hope of getting better players is to sign good players that were injured like Barnett or in somebodys trash heap like Pears.

Both the Redskins & Eagles have proven that throwing a lot of money at FAs is no guarantee for success either.

There has to be a happy medium.

I think the way to win is this: Build mostly through the draft, supplement through FA, and when you get good enough, go for broke to add the few missing pieces and hope you win before it all falls apart.

The Redskins and Eagles try to buy championships. The Bills try to build exclusively through the draft, but draft poorly, so they are constantly re-drafting the same positions while new holes keep opening up, which they attempt to fill with 3rd tier FA's rejected from other teams. Occasionally, they overpay a FA who turns out to be useless.

Neither way is going to win.

[OpIv37]

We can do better at every position if your are just taking it outside the context of the real world. Again...what's the plan? Who is better? Are they willing to come here? How much would it take? Would high pay for a RT affect the mindset of the other Olinemen and our LTs? How much is the max you are willing to spend? Or would you prefer to go the draft route? If so, who are you targeting? What round? What's the backup plan if they are taken?



I don't have the solution. I just know we can do better.

I don't know why you're attempting to hold me accountable for a solution instead of wondering why the FO decided to settle for Pears rather than answering these questions. They're the ones that get paid millions to get it right, not me.

[Philagape]

The only assumption I've made is that Pears is mediocre and we can do better.

I'll ask again, which positions should remain mediocre? Because there simply must be mediocre starters under the salary cap. Every championship team in the history of football has included some mediocre starters.

I'm just asking because you seem hell-bent on upgrading right tackle.
How about, for example, right guard? Urbik is an RFA, should they re-sign him?
Tight end? Wide receiver? Bell is up too.

[mysticsoto]

I don't have the solution. I just know we can do better.

I don't know why you're attempting to hold me accountable for a solution instead of wondering why the FO decided to settle for Pears rather than answering these questions. They're the ones that get paid millions to get it right, not me.

I want us to concentrate on the BIG holes we have - we need TWO OLBs. We need a speedy WR. We need better CBs. We may need a QB. We need better depth at the OLINE. Those are alot of positions that we need to fix. The draft is not likely to handle it all. Some will need to be addressed through FA. If we have enough holes, why create more??? Pears wasn't a huge hole no matter how bad you are trying to make him sound.

[JCBills]

Great deal, good player, interesting situation.

I'm still a little confused as to why people are saying he's a backup when he's played as good or better than each player on our offensive line this season?

Thanks Coach, have been interested in the details since starting the thread the other day.

Because all people care about is what round he was picked in.

[Ickybaluky]

I'll ask again, which positions should remain mediocre? Because there simply must be mediocre starters under the salary cap. Every championship team in the history of football has included some mediocre starters.

Not to mention that OL play requires a lot of coordination between players. If you look at the top OL's, they usually are made up of guys who have been together a while and developed chemistry. It isn't just physical skill, it is the ability of the 5 players along the line to play as a unit. Communication and continuity are huge factors.

I don't know how fans can judge line play, anyway. If the Bills think Pears is playing well enough that they want to award him with a modest extension, who are we as fans to say otherwise? You just can't tell by watching TV, you need to know the assignments and scheme to really get a handle on what his happening.

[Fixxxer]

Not to mention that OL play requires a lot of coordination between players. If you look at the top OL's, they usually are made up of guys who have been together a while and developed chemistry. It isn't just physical skill, it is the ability of the 5 players along the line to play as a unit. Communication and continuity are huge factors.

I don't know how fans can judge line play, anyway. If the Bills think Pears is playing well enough that they want to award him with a modest extension, who are we as fans to say otherwise? You just can't tell by watching TV, you need to know the assignments and scheme to really get a handle on what his happening.

To Bills fans, if the guy isn't a 1st rounder he is useless and needs upgrade.

For example Wood never has a bad day in the fans eyes. If he has a shaky day, no Bills fan will be objective about it. He gets a pass, always. The next guy in line is Levitre and so on. The later the draft pick the greater the criticism.

The tackles are always harshly critized every single game, regardless of performance. They could only have one mishap or error in the game and the fans will bring that up in every post game thread until the next game.
Are they perfect? Not at all but you would think they're a the worst players in the NFL after reading those threads.

It doesn't matter where the player comes from, it only matters if he can play.