Why do people think we can't afford Byrd?

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Let's set aside the "free safeties aren't big money", "Byrd isn't a gamechanger", "Doesn't fit Pettine's scheme" sillyness for a second and focus purely on the cap space aspect. Why do people think we cannot afford to re-sign Jairus Byrd? People keep saying foolish things like "WHAT IF WE CAN'T RESIGN SPILLER?!?!"

Let's be clear about this: We have more than enough money to re-sign both and any of the other FAs coming down the pipe.

More. Than. Enough.

Keep in mind that most people are perfectly content to keep Byrd at 7M per year, but balk at paying him 9.25 or whatever he supposedly wants. Let's assume that's a correct report for the sake of argument. That's a difference of 2.25 million between what people are ok with and what they are willing to dump one of our best players for. Right now the Bills have 18 million in salary cap space including Byrd's franchise tag.

Now look at some of the Bills' horrendous contracts right now:
Mark Anderson (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/mark-anderson/)
2013 Cap hit: 4Million
2014: 5.5M
2015: 6.5M

This guy is a 3rd down pass rushing "specialist" who provided exactly one sack in 5.5 games before being hurt last year. Unless he turns into an enormous asset, he should be first on the firing line in either 2014 or 15, when it saves us millions in dead cap.

Brad Smith (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/brad-smith/)
2013: 3.75M
2014: 4M

This guy is a crappy wideout and a massive liability at QB. 3.75M for a return specialist is beyond dumb since we supposedly kept McKelvin for the exact same job. Cutting this guy alone pays for the Byrd deal for two seasons.

Fred Jackson (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/fred-jackson/)
2013: 3.7M
2014: 3.7M

Look, I like Fred Jackson. I have one of his TShirts. He's probably my favorite Bill since over the last few seasons. But Spiller has taken his job and he'll be 34 by the time this deal is up. This contract was really a "make up" kind of deal for his late start to the NFL, but is anyone seriously going to be sad if we offer him a vet minimum contract in 2015 and he leaves?

Rian Lindell (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/rian-lindell/)
2013: 3M
2014: 3M
2015: 3.1M

Ok, Lindell has been good to us for a lot of years, but Gailey didn't even trust him in a dome with the game on the line. We've tried drafting his replacement twice. Twice! Let it end!

Erik Pears (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/erik-pears/)
2013: 2.8M
2014: 3.45M

It Hairston does indeed take his spot this offseason, that is way, wayyyy too much to pay for a backup right tackle.

That's 5 bad contracts the Bills can get out from long before Spiller becomes a free agent in 2016. And on top of that, every single one of them is projected as a backup at best this year. Dumping Byrd, a 26 year old multiple all-pro, to avoid cutting overpaid backups is the height of stupidity.

A 6-10 team sitting on 18 million in cap space should not be dumping All-Pros in their prime to save money. Period.

[tampabay25690]

But y does Byrd deserve 9 mill a year???

[TigerJ]

There's no question the Bills can afford to make Byrd the highest paid safety in the league, at least with respect to this year's cap. The problem is, they appear not to value the position of safety highly enough to do so. The issue is not just can they afford it now. The issue is cap management. If they commit to Byrd's asking price, there's no question it will affect cap room out several years. The Bills may want to save that cap room to offer raises to players at positions they value more highly, or sign a big name free agent or two to a position they value more highly.

[clumping platelets]

He does not deserve to be the highest paid FS in the league.

I'd get Eric Wood signed to an extension and then trade Byrd.

[BillsFever21]

The Bills have been great with cap management over the years. Maybe one of the best teams in the league. We're always around 10-20 million under the cap every season. I bet not many other teams can say that :rolleyes:

[BillsFever21]

Let's set aside the "free safeties aren't big money", "Byrd isn't a gamechanger", "Doesn't fit Pettine's scheme" sillyness for a second and focus purely on the cap space aspect. Why do people think we cannot afford to re-sign Jairus Byrd? People keep saying foolish things like "WHAT IF WE CAN'T RESIGN SPILLER?!?!"

Let's be clear about this: We have more than enough money to re-sign both and any of the other FAs coming down the pipe.

More. Than. Enough.

Keep in mind that most people are perfectly content to keep Byrd at 7M per year, but balk at paying him 9.25 or whatever he supposedly wants. Let's assume that's a correct report for the sake of argument. That's a difference of 2.25 million between what people are ok with and what they are willing to dump one of our best players for. Right now the Bills have 18 million in salary cap space including Byrd's franchise tag.

Now look at some of the Bills' horrendous contracts right now:
Mark Anderson (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/mark-anderson/)
2013 Cap hit: 4Million
2014: 5.5M
2015: 6.5M

This guy is a 3rd down pass rushing "specialist" who provided exactly one sack in 5.5 games before being hurt last year. Unless he turns into an enormous asset, he should be first on the firing line in either 2014 or 15, when it saves us millions in dead cap.

Brad Smith (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/brad-smith/)
2013: 3.75M
2014: 4M

This guy is a crappy wideout and a massive liability at QB. 3.75M for a return specialist is beyond dumb since we supposedly kept McKelvin for the exact same job. Cutting this guy alone pays for the Byrd deal for two seasons.

Fred Jackson (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/fred-jackson/)
2013: 3.7M
2014: 3.7M

Look, I like Fred Jackson. I have one of his TShirts. He's probably my favorite Bill since over the last few seasons. But Spiller has taken his job and he'll be 34 by the time this deal is up. This contract was really a "make up" kind of deal for his late start to the NFL, but is anyone seriously going to be sad if we offer him a vet minimum contract in 2015 and he leaves?

Rian Lindell (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/rian-lindell/)
2013: 3M
2014: 3M
2015: 3.1M

Ok, Lindell has been good to us for a lot of years, but Gailey didn't even trust him in a dome with the game on the line. We've tried drafting his replacement twice. Twice! Let it end!

Erik Pears (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/erik-pears/)
2013: 2.8M
2014: 3.45M

It Hairston does indeed take his spot this offseason, that is way, wayyyy too much to pay for a backup right tackle.

That's 5 bad contracts the Bills can get out from long before Spiller becomes a free agent in 2016. And on top of that, every single one of them is projected as a backup at best this year. Dumping Byrd, a 26 year old multiple all-pro, to avoid cutting overpaid backups is the height of stupidity.

A 6-10 team sitting on 18 million in cap space should not be dumping All-Pros in their prime to save money. Period.

I couldn't agree more. What also gets you in the most cap trouble is when you continue to sign average players for 3-6 million dollars a year to be backups or crappy starters. Then when you end up cutting them having all of the dead cap space like with Fitzpatrick. The dead cap space from bad contracts to guys like that can eat up around 10% or more of your cap in any given year.

You keep your young top players. The Bills don't draft many of them which makes it even more important to keep them around. Also if Byrd wants 9 million a year then that's his negotiation number and would probably take 8 million.

With being 25 million under the cap this season(without Byrd's franchise tag number) signing him to an extension wouldn't have hurt our cap in the future one bit if he performed like he has. When you're sitting there with all that extra cap space you could easily front load the contract this year and his cap number would be a bargain the rest of the years.

If he received an average of 8 million a year for 5 years you could've easily given him a cap number of 15 million this season and still had 10 million left over. That would've only left 25 million over the next 4 years and that's assuming he met all of his incentives. Much of that 40 million would've been monopoly money like any other contract. In reality he would see around 30-35 million tops or so over that span. That makes the cap hit even less.

Hell we have backup tackles like Pears with a 3 million dollar cap number, old backup RB who can't stay healthy with a 3.7 million cap hit and not to mention a situational pass rusher in Anderson making 5.5 this year. Now that was a horrible contract but keeping your best draft picks is a waste of money.

The same people will be saying the same thing when other good players we have drafted becomes a FA too. There will always be the next guys a couple years from now you need to save the money for when the time comes. If you don't ever use your cap space to keep your best young players then you will never build a winning team for the long-term. You will always have to use you draft picks to replace them instead of trying to upgrade other positions or fill in much needed depth. That's why we are drafting in the top 10 every single season.

I'd rather keep your best young players and try to build a team that can be successful and maybe win something. Then with good cap management you can make years before you have to pay the piper and it gives you that window of opportunity. After that you keep the best players you can and try to rebuild again. What's the worse that can happen you end up a 4-6 win team after that? Well that's what we already have been for a decade with this same current strategy we have been using since then.

[tampabay25690]

He does not deserve to be the highest paid FS in the league.

I'd get Eric Wood signed to an extension and then trade Byrd.

Thank u!!!

[jimmifli]

But y does Byrd deserve 9 mill a year???
Because there is no better way to spend $9 million dollars on improving our team this offseason.

[jimmifli]

He does not deserve to be the highest paid FS in the league.
He deserves to be one of the top 5 paid safeties in the league, and he happens to be the only one with a contract that is up. So until next year he'll be the highest paid safety, and then he won't be. And pretty soon he'll have a contract that is cheap compared to the top safety.

[Ingtar33]

But y does Byrd deserve 9 mill a year???

lets see...

Ed Reed - first 4 seasons.
Tackles - 271
Pass Defended - 53
Interceptions - 22
Forced Fumbles - 4
Fumble Recoveries - 3
Sacks - 4
Defensive TDs - 3

Jarius Byrd - first 4 seasons
Tackles - 308
Pass Defended - 27
Interceptions - 18
Forced Fumbles - 10
Fumble Recoveries - 5
Sacks - 2
Defensive TDs - 2

Loos like pretty much a similar player.

[kishoph]

lets see...

Ed Reed - first 4 seasons.
Tackles - 271
Pass Defended - 53
Interceptions - 22
Forced Fumbles - 4
Fumble Recoveries - 3
Sacks - 4
Defensive TDs - 3

Jarius Byrd - first 4 seasons
Tackles - 308
Pass Defended - 27
Interceptions - 18
Forced Fumbles - 10
Fumble Recoveries - 5
Sacks - 2
Defensive TDs - 2

Loos like pretty much a similar player.

Look at the passes defensed, last year alone Reed had 16 PD's, Byrd had 6. Reed has consistently been a top safety for 10 years, Byrd has had 2 good years out of 4. The Bills have offered to make Byrd one of the highest paid safeties in the league, Byrd wants to be the top paid. WGR's reporting that Byrd will not consider any contract, unless it has him as the top paid at his position and he is the the top player at his position.

[GingerP]

Look at the passes defensed, last year alone Reed had 16 PD's, Byrd had 6. Reed has consistently been a top safety for 10 years, Byrd has had 2 good years out of 4. The Bills have offered to make Byrd one of the highest paid safeties in the league, Byrd wants to be the top paid. WGR's reporting that Byrd will not consider any contract, unless it has him as the top paid at his position and he is the the top player at his position.

Ed Reed is one of the greatest S ever. To be even in the same ballpark as him says a lot. Nobody knows what Byrd is asking or what the Bills are offering, but the fact is Byrd has proven to be a very good player in the NFL. He is one of the top S in the NFL by any measure.

Who cares about leading the team in cap room? I'd rather have a good team tight against the cap then suck and have lots of cap room. The bad contracts are the ones where you pay top dollar for a guy who produces, the bad contracts are the ones you pay a lot of money to a guy who isn't worth it. Byrd is a good player and deserves to get paid, paying him a lot is not going to cause cap problems.

[tampabay25690]

lets see...

Ed Reed - first 4 seasons.
Tackles - 271
Pass Defended - 53
Interceptions - 22
Forced Fumbles - 4
Fumble Recoveries - 3
Sacks - 4
Defensive TDs - 3

Jarius Byrd - first 4 seasons
Tackles - 308
Pass Defended - 27
Interceptions - 18
Forced Fumbles - 10
Fumble Recoveries - 5
Sacks - 2
Defensive TDs - 2

Loos like pretty much a similar player.

Dont ever compare Byrd to Ed Reed....
U can throw all the stats u want at me...
Jarvis Byrd is not a 9 mill per year safety

[better days]

Dont ever compare Byrd to Ed Reed....
U can throw all the stats u want at me...
Jarvis Byrd is not a 9 mill per year safety

Thank you. This is the trouble with stats. Anyone with two eyes that watches & knows the game of football can see Ed Reed is a HOF player, Byrd is not. Receivers FEAR Reed, they don't fear Byrd.

[tampabay25690]

Thank you. This is the trouble with stats. Anyone with two eyes that watches & knows the game of football can see Ed Reed is a HOF player, Byrd is not. Receivers FEAR Reed, they don't fear Byrd.

I want Byrd to stay but for 7 mill per.....
Sorry just don't pay a guy 9 mill per just because u have cap space

[better days]

I want Byrd to stay but for 7 mill per.....
Sorry just don't pay a guy 9 mill per just because u have cap space

I would be happy if Byrd would be willing to stay at the pay of a top 5 safety, but he wants the money of the #1 Safety in the NFL which he is not. Hell, Mark Barron of the Bucs may have a better year this year than Byrd.

[The King]

analytics.

[Figster]

Buffalo cannot continue to let good players go If we ever want to turn things around.

Does Buffalo provide the security most other teams provide with regime changes every few years? no

Has Buffalo proven to be a place where an athlete can succeed from a team perspective? no, absolutely not

So you pay your best athletes a little more then you should, or lose them,

its really that simple...

[OpIv37]

The Bills have been great with cap management over the years. Maybe one of the best teams in the league. We're always around 10-20 million under the cap every season. I bet not many other teams can say that :rolleyes:
This drives me out of my mind. I'm so glad there's a cap floor now. With being $10 million under, you could maybe argue that it's for the long term- they don't want to commit $4-5 million to a guy because they know they'll have to re-sign people in the future and won't always have that much room, etc. $20 million is inexcusable. Obviously they can't sign the biggest FA out there every season, but as bad as this team is, there is no way they could possibly say $20 million wouldn't have bought a couple players who could have helped the team.

[ParanoidAndroid]

Buffalo cannot continue to let good players go If we ever want to turn things around.

Does Buffalo provide the security most other teams provide with regime changes every few years? no

Has Buffalo proven to be a place where an athlete can succeed from a team perspective? no, absolutely not

So you pay your best athletes a little more then you should, or lose them,

its really that simple...

It's that simple until you have a handful of decent but overpaid players not getting you to the playoffs and putting you up against the cap.

[NOT THE DUDE...]

Let's set aside the "free safeties aren't big money", "Byrd isn't a gamechanger", "Doesn't fit Pettine's scheme" sillyness for a second and focus purely on the cap space aspect. Why do people think we cannot afford to re-sign Jairus Byrd? People keep saying foolish things like "WHAT IF WE CAN'T RESIGN SPILLER?!?!"

Let's be clear about this: We have more than enough money to re-sign both and any of the other FAs coming down the pipe.

More. Than. Enough.

Keep in mind that most people are perfectly content to keep Byrd at 7M per year, but balk at paying him 9.25 or whatever he supposedly wants. Let's assume that's a correct report for the sake of argument. That's a difference of 2.25 million between what people are ok with and what they are willing to dump one of our best players for. Right now the Bills have 18 million in salary cap space including Byrd's franchise tag.

Now look at some of the Bills' horrendous contracts right now:
Mark Anderson (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/mark-anderson/)
2013 Cap hit: 4Million
2014: 5.5M
2015: 6.5M

This guy is a 3rd down pass rushing "specialist" who provided exactly one sack in 5.5 games before being hurt last year. Unless he turns into an enormous asset, he should be first on the firing line in either 2014 or 15, when it saves us millions in dead cap.

Brad Smith (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/brad-smith/)
2013: 3.75M
2014: 4M

This guy is a crappy wideout and a massive liability at QB. 3.75M for a return specialist is beyond dumb since we supposedly kept McKelvin for the exact same job. Cutting this guy alone pays for the Byrd deal for two seasons.

Fred Jackson (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/fred-jackson/)
2013: 3.7M
2014: 3.7M

Look, I like Fred Jackson. I have one of his TShirts. He's probably my favorite Bill since over the last few seasons. But Spiller has taken his job and he'll be 34 by the time this deal is up. This contract was really a "make up" kind of deal for his late start to the NFL, but is anyone seriously going to be sad if we offer him a vet minimum contract in 2015 and he leaves?

Rian Lindell (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/rian-lindell/)
2013: 3M
2014: 3M
2015: 3.1M

Ok, Lindell has been good to us for a lot of years, but Gailey didn't even trust him in a dome with the game on the line. We've tried drafting his replacement twice. Twice! Let it end!

Erik Pears (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/erik-pears/)
2013: 2.8M
2014: 3.45M

It Hairston does indeed take his spot this offseason, that is way, wayyyy too much to pay for a backup right tackle.

That's 5 bad contracts the Bills can get out from long before Spiller becomes a free agent in 2016. And on top of that, every single one of them is projected as a backup at best this year. Dumping Byrd, a 26 year old multiple all-pro, to avoid cutting overpaid backups is the height of stupidity.

A 6-10 team sitting on 18 million in cap space should not be dumping All-Pros in their prime to save money. Period.

I somewhat agree on brad smith and lindell, but the other examples I don't agree with. mark Anderson when healthy is a really good pass rusher on the edge. great athlete... you always need that vet backup ot, and fred is still really good. as this has been discussed repeatedly, Carrington, wood, spiller, hairston are going to be paid major dollars imo, so you have to make a choice. I just think id rather have those guys than a fs who can get 4-6 ints a year... jmo

[justasportsfan]

lets see...

Ed Reed - first 4 seasons.
Tackles - 271
Pass Defended - 53
Interceptions - 22
Forced Fumbles - 4
Fumble Recoveries - 3
Sacks - 4
Defensive TDs - 3

Jarius Byrd - first 4 seasons
Tackles - 308
Pass Defended - 27
Interceptions - 18
Forced Fumbles - 10
Fumble Recoveries - 5
Sacks - 2
Defensive TDs - 2

Loos like pretty much a similar player.

your tackle stats are going to go up when your DL can't stop anyone. Your pass defended stats are going up when the QB isn't getting any pressure. Etc.etc.

With that being said, I was hoping the bills would at least try to lock Byrd up . If the bills really want you, they will attempt to lock you up way before you hit the market. Thats what they did with Kyle Williams. If Cj plays like they hope he will, the bills will lock him up before he hits the market. Same goes with guys like Carrington.

IMO, as soon as Marrone has had time to sort everything he inherited, the bills will make another big splash in FA in the future.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

mark Anderson when healthy is a really good pass rusher on the edge. great athlete...

Anderson is one of the most inconsistent players in the league. He's played seven seasons and topped 10 sacks only twice, five years and two teams apart.


you always need that vet backup ot,

Not at that price you don't. Pears is fine and I'm fine keeping him, but if it comes down to money you cut overpaid backups, not elite starters. I thought that would be obvious.


and fred is still really good.

Fred is 32. Halfbacks tend to hit a wall somewhere around 30 and once they lose it, it's gone. In 2011 Michael Turner was a 1300 yard rusher. In 2013 he's out of work and likely to be out of football. If we keep Jackson to the end of his deal we are not giving a 34 year old halfback anything more than vet minimum.


as this has been discussed repeatedly, Carrington, wood, spiller, hairston are going to be paid major dollars imo, so you have to make a choice. I just think id rather have those guys than a fs who can get 4-6 ints a year... jmo

Of those, only Spiller should command top dollar. Wood needs to prove himself able to finish a season before we pay him a lot of guaranteed money, and Hairston and Carrington have been rotational backups so far. Can we at least see how they acquit themselves as starters before we start dumping All-Pros to pay for them?

And as for Spiller - he doesn't become a free agent for 3 years. 3 years! That's a lifetime in the NFL. If we signed Byrd, we could pay out the majority of his cash in those years and their contracts would never conflict.

[jdaltroy5]

Why would we want to blow 9 mil a year on a guy who consistently makes game changing plays????

Do you guys have any idea how many mediocre players we could sign for that price???

[jdaltroy5]

your tackle stats are going to go up when your DL can't stop anyone. Your pass defended stats are going up when the QB isn't getting any pressure. Etc.etc.

With that being said, I was hoping the bills would at least try to lock Byrd up . If the bills really want you, they will attempt to lock you up way before you hit the market. Thats what they did with Kyle Williams. If Cj plays like they hope he will, the bills will lock him up before he hits the market. Same goes with guys like Carrington.

IMO, as soon as Marrone has had time to sort everything he inherited, the bills will make another big splash in FA in the future.

There's no need to make a big splash is FA.

People are *****ing about overpaying Byrd, do you think we're going to sign a big FA for EXACTLY what he's worth?

Plus, I'd rather just re-sign a guy that has already played on the team for 4 years. They know everything about him already so there are very few intangibles to consider.

[BuffaloWingEater]

Byrd should be signed. Here's why?
1. He's one of the best safeties in the league
2. Levitre walked. Money not spend on him should go towards Byrd. How much did Ten give him? Oh that's right, Byrd money and we are talking about a Guard
3. He is drafted talent. Keeping these players is what creates a Core of talent since we have difficulty signing fa's
4. Cap trouble, which the ills are never in can be solved with guaranteed money. Give it to him. That's all players care about anyway
5. Not signing Byrd signifies that no matter who is running the show they are the same bumbling ills.

:popcorn:

[The Jokeman]

But y does Byrd deserve 9 mill a year???

Because good teams find a way to keep their good players and/or replace them on the off chance they can't keep them. Thus far the Bills haven't shown an ability to replace or find many good players in the draft or through free agency. Last offseason was more promising because we were able to keep Stevie without having to franchise him and were able sign Mario. Now it looks like the Bills are RECHARGED to be their same old bumbling selves.

[justasportsfan]

There's no need to make a big splash is FA.

People are *****ing about overpaying Byrd, do you think we're going to sign a big FA for EXACTLY what he's worth?

Plus, I'd rather just re-sign a guy that has already played on the team for 4 years. They know everything about him already so there are very few intangibles to consider.

If Marrone and Pettine wanted him badly, IMO, they would have paid him. Just like Gailey wanted Fitz.

I agree we don't need to make a big splash . I guess what I'm saying is that when Marrone has an most of the core players he wants in place, we're going to be big players in FA to put the final touches . The bills signed Mario and IMO from the advice of Wanny(who Gailey wanted) who was a 4-3 guy.

[jdaltroy5]

If Marrone and Pettine wanted him badly, IMO, they would have paid him. Just like Gailey wanted Fitz.
Well if they don't want Byrd, then I'm already willing to write this new regime off.

This guy is the best player on our defense.

Good coaches design a scheme around their best players, they don't insert mediocre players into their scheme.

That's EXACTLY what Gailey did. We had a stud at RB and a stout OL, but yet we continued to fling the ball with a mediocre QB because Gailey loved the pass happy spread O.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Well if they don't want Byrd, then I'm already willing to write this new regime off.

This guy is the best player on our defense.

Good coaches design a scheme around their best players, they don't insert mediocre players into their scheme.

That's EXACTLY what Gailey did. We had a stud at RB and a stout OL, but yet we continued to fling the ball with a mediocre QB because Gailey loved the pass happy spread O.

I'm with you on this 100%. Real talk: Pettine is a fine DC and I'm excited for him, but he's not some visionary genius. His scheme isn't bigger than the players. You adjust your scheme to fit your best talent (On this team that would be the Williams and Byrd so far, with Gilmore and Dareus hopefully making the leap) and not the other way around.

[justasportsfan]

Well if they don't want Byrd, then I'm already willing to write this new regime off.

This guy is the best player on our defense.

Good coaches design a scheme around their best players, they don't insert mediocre players into their scheme.

That's EXACTLY what Gailey did. We had a stud at RB and a stout OL, but yet we continued to fling the ball with a mediocre QB because Gailey loved the pass happy spread O.

I don't think they didn't want Byrd. NOt just at the price he was asking for . It could be that Pettine values the DL more than safeties. :idunno:

[justasportsfan]

Pettine's expertise remains to be seen but one things for sure ,when the bills Dl go not pressure on the qb's the last few years, having Byrd did nothing either.

[jdaltroy5]

I don't think they didn't want Byrd. NOt just at the price he was asking for . It could be that Pettine values the DL more than safeties. :idunno:

Mike Pettine's job shouldn't be to put a value on players. That job should be left up to Overdorf and Whaley.

Pettine's main goal at this point should be to have as many playmakers as possible on his defense.

[justasportsfan]

Mike Pettine's job shouldn't be to put a value on players. That job should be left up to Overdorf and Whaley.

Pettine's main goal at this point should be to have as many playmakers as possible on his defense.

I agree. Just saying that the coach's input has weighed heavily on management under Nix. I would guess that 9 million is something you ask your coaches if whether a player worth it especially in their system.

[jdaltroy5]

I agree. Just saying that the coach's input has weighed heavily on management under Nix. I would guess that 9 million is something you ask your coaches if whether a player worth it especially in their system.
If he did ask Pettine, then he should've just said yes. I know if I were a first time OC, I would much rather have the perennial pro bowler over a mid round rookie and a failed CB.

[justasportsfan]

If he did ask Pettine, then he should've just said yes. I know if I were a first time OC, I would much rather have the perennial pro bowler over a mid round rookie and a failed CB.
easier said than done especially when there are other positions on this team that need to be addressed as well. If my D needed more emphasis on the Dl, that's where I'd spend the money.

[jdaltroy5]

easier said than done especially when there are other positions on this team that need to be addressed as well. If my D needed more emphasis on the Dl, that's where I'd spend the money.
But it's not like we're strapped.

We HAVE the money and cap space to pay him.

That money will literally go back into the bank account of a 94 year old billionaire.

[justasportsfan]

But it's not like we're strapped.

We HAVE the money and cap space to pay him.

That money will literally go back into the bank account of a 94 year old billionaire.
like i said in a different post, I wouldn't be surprised if the bills are setting u the cap to resign guys like CJ to a big contract instead.

[jdaltroy5]

like i said in a different post, I wouldn't be surprised if the bills are setting u the cap to resign guys like CJ to a big contract instead.
CJ Spiller doesn't become a free agent until 2016.

They could be paying Byrd 4 mil a year by the time CJ's contract comes up.

Whaley and Overdorf should just quit right now if they can't manage to get both of those contracts under the cap.

[better days]

If he did ask Pettine, then he should've just said yes. I know if I were a first time OC, I would much rather have the perennial pro bowler over a mid round rookie and a failed CB.

Just because Williams failed at CB does not mean he will not be a GOOD Safety. And yes I know Williams will be learning a new position, but Byrd has never played in this defense either & if he never reports to training camp which is VERY LIKELY IMO, then Williams may be the better option because at least he will have learned this defense.

[jdaltroy5]

Just because Williams failed at CB does not mean he will not be a GOOD Safety. And yes I know Williams will be learning a new position, but Byrd has never played in this defense either & if he never reports to training camp which is VERY LIKELY IMO, then Williams may be the better option because at least he will have learned this defense.
I'm not saying that he will automatically fail.

But if I'm a DC, I'd much rather have the guy that has made the pro bowl at his actual position, not the guy who had to be moved the S because he couldn't play CB.

[better days]

Warren Sapp said on NFL Network that if the team does not make the effort to sign you, then they don't value you as much as you think of yourself. You need to look at yourself, sign the tender & prove to them on the field your worth.

[justasportsfan]

I'm not saying that he will automatically fail.

But if I'm a DC, I'd much rather have the guy that has made the pro bowl at his actual position, not the guy who had to be moved the S because he couldn't play CB.

Do most new coaches like to tell GM to pay players they just inherited to franchise record deals before they've even had a chance to see them up close?

[IlluminatusUIUC]

like i said in a different post, I wouldn't be surprised if the bills are setting u the cap to resign guys like CJ to a big contract instead.

Did you read my opening post? Do you have anything to refute the numbers I put out? We can easily afford to retain our own FAs.

[better days]

Did you read my opening post? Do you have anything to refute the numbers I put out? We can easily afford to retain our own FAs.

It is not a matter of can they afford him or not, as Sapp said it is a matter of how much they VALUE him. I agree with Sapp let him sign the tender & PROVE his worth. Then next year he will get the long term contract from the Bills or another team.

IMO, if he holds out & does not report to camp, he is hurting himself more than the team.

[justasportsfan]

Did you read my opening post? Do you have anything to refute the numbers I put out? We can easily afford to retain our own FAs.
I've read it, but if you read my other posts, maybe Pettine doesn't value the safety as much. I don't know.

If you also read my other posts , I have always been for the bills paying Byrd but not no.1 safety money in the league.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

It is not a matter of can they afford him or not,

Then people need to stop claiming we can't afford him. If they don't want to pay him, that's a different argument altogether, but will you at least agree that we could if we wanted to?


as Sapp said it is a matter of how much they VALUE him. I agree with Sapp let him sign the tender & PROVE his worth. Then next year he will get the long term contract from the Bills or another team.

IMO, if he holds out & does not report to camp, he is hurting himself more than the team.

Two All-Pro selections in four years is proving one's worth IMO.


I've read it, but if you read my other posts, maybe Pettine doesn't value the safety as much. I don't know.

Maybe he doesn't, but as I've said he should value this safety.

I think people are taking positional value way too far. Yes, QB/OL/etc are a higher priority than Free Safety, but I will take an elite FS (Byrd) over an average lineman (Pears) or an inconsistent pass rusher (Anderson) any day.

[jdaltroy5]

Do most new coaches like to tell GM to pay players they just inherited to franchise record deals before they've even had a chance to see them up close?
I'm not saying that Pettine told Whaley to pay Byrd. Not even a little bit.

I'm saying that if Whaley asked Pettine if they should keep Byrd, then he damn well better of said yes.

It would be downright cocky of him to think that he can just replace a pro bowl safety with two guys that have never played safety in the NFL before.

[SpikedLemonade]

I've read it, but if you read my other posts, maybe Pettine doesn't value the safety as much. I don't know.

If you also read my other posts , I have always been for the bills paying Byrd but not no.1 safety money in the league.

So the Bills don't value Safeties.

The Bills don't value Guards.

The Bills do seem to value spending $25M less than the salary cap this year.

Why?

Because they know that if they spend more on salaries it will not be made up by an equal amount in increased revenues this year.

They know the fans will be patient with a poor record this year given there is a new coaching staff and a new QB.

This should be a very profitable year for the Bills.

Ralph's heirs will appreciate that.

[BuffaloWingEater]

Warren Sapp said on NFL Network that if the team does not make the effort to sign you, then they don't value you as much as you think of yourself. You need to look at yourself, sign the tender & prove to them on the field your worth.

did warren tell that to the raiders?

[justasportsfan]

So the Bills don't value Safeties.

The Bills don't value Guards.

. I did not say that. They may value these positions but maybe not as much as paying them top league money especially when the new coaches haven't had a chance to see them up close .

[The King]

I'm not saying that Pettine told Whaley to pay Byrd. Not even a little bit.

I'm saying that if Whaley asked Pettine if they should keep Byrd, then he damn well better of said yes.

It would be downright cocky of him to think that he can just replace a pro bowl safety with two guys that have never played safety in the NFL before.

It would also be stupid to fight for a player who has made no effort to get acquainted with the new staff,

[jdaltroy5]

It would also be stupid to fight for a player who has made no effort to get acquainted with the new staff,
That's petty.

They're going to lose one of the best players on the team because he wouldn't say hi?

[The King]

That's petty.

They're going to lose one of the best players on the team because he wouldn't say hi?

It might be. This is where the lines get blurry for me.

But you're going to make a guy the highest paid safety, making him a face of the franchise. Wouldnt it be nice to know he's on the same page a your staff and that they work well schematically/chemistry wise?

[better days]

did warren tell that to the raiders?

Sapp is a first ballot HOF player. I think the Raiders signed him for his leadership as much as anything to teach Tommy Kelly a thing or two about being a pro football player. Too bad Kelly never learned.

[jdaltroy5]

It might be. This is where the lines get blurry for me.

But you're going to make a guy the highest paid safety, making him a face of the franchise. Wouldnt it be nice to know he's on the same page a your staff and that they work well schematically/chemistry wise?

He's not even under contract at the moment. Is he even allowed to be attending team functions without being under contract?

He would've already started learning the defense and been at all the practices if they would've just paid him.

[better days]

He's not even under contract at the moment. Is he even allowed to be attending team functions without being under contract?

He would've already started learning the defense and been at all the practices if they would've just paid him.

Or he could have signed the tag.

[The King]

He's not even under contract at the moment. Is he even allowed to be attending team functions without being under contract?

He would've already started learning the defense and been at all the practices if they would've just paid him.

Like I said this is where things get blurry for me. Negotiations work both ways. If he wanted to be here, he'd be here. If the Bills wanted him badly enough they'd pay him.

If I were him, I would've at least reached out shown I was committed and I would think that would help my case towards getting the deal done. But he has an agent and his agent is advising him otherwise.

[justasportsfan]

Jay Cutler contract extension talks ended when Chicago Bears hired Marc Trestman

The implication is, Trestman wants to see Cutler perform in his offense before committing a big contract to the quarterback.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/jay-cutler-contract-extension-talks-ended-chicago-bears-164134915.html

[jdaltroy5]

Or he could have signed the tag.
He didn't want to sign the tag because he wanted a long term contract.

[jdaltroy5]

Like I said this is where things get blurry for me. Negotiations work both ways. If he wanted to be here, he'd be here. If the Bills wanted him badly enough they'd pay him.

If I were him, I would've at least reached out shown I was committed and I would think that would help my case towards getting the deal done. But he has an agent and his agent is advising him otherwise.
And the Bills obviously don't want him badly enough.

I'm not giving the Bills the benefit of the doubt after 15 years of ineptitude.

If this were the Steelers, Packers, Pats, or Ravens who ALWAYS seem to replace star players with young up and comers, then I wouldn't worry.

But this is the Bills, who always seem to let star players walk and then use a high draft pick the next year to replace them.

[better days]

He didn't want to sign the tag because he wanted a long term contract.

But NOT with the Bills. He wants to be paid as the #1 Safety in the NFL by the Bills. Like Peters before him, I have no doubt he would accept less from another team.

[jdaltroy5]

But NOT with the Bills. He wants to be paid as the #1 Safety in the NFL by the Bills. Like Peters before him, I have no doubt he would accept less from another team.
Why do you think that is?

Do you think it's because the Bills are such a well run organization that adequately pays their superstars in attempt to maintain their perennial competitiveness?

Or...

[Mike]

So the Bills don't value Safeties.

The Bills don't value Guards.

The Bills do seem to value spending $25M less than the salary cap this year.

Why?

Because they know that if they spend more on salaries it will not be made up by an equal amount in increased revenues this year.

They know the fans will be patient with a poor record this year given there is a new coaching staff and a new QB.

This should be a very profitable year for the Bills.

Ralph's heirs will appreciate that.

Exactly! It's funny how many Bills fans would rather put an extra $25M in a billionaires account than have a winning team.

Clements, Peters, Levitre, Byrd...et al
Most often when one of our own makes it to the Top we let them walk in FA claiming we don't have enough money or that they are not worth it.

Basically, many Bills fans believe that paying top players market value is not worth it and they would rather the money go to a 94 year old billionaire. Ironically, the players are then accused of being greedy. Lol

Mark my worlds: the only way to built a champion is to have top talent and you can not have top talent unless your paying them!!!

Pears, Anderson, Carington, type players will Never win you a SB.

So Bills fans, STOP bring so damn cheap and remember its Not your $$$

[Mike]

But NOT with the Bills. He wants to be paid as the #1 Safety in the NFL by the Bills. Like Peters before him, I have no doubt he would accept less from another team.

Dude... Obviously your clueless about how negotiations work.

Players ask for a high number, teams offer a low number and eventually they meet somewhere in the middle. Peters did not end up being the highest paid LT in the league. He was posturing, starting high and the Eagles met him at a very reasonable number (conversely the Bills low balled him).

As For Top Paid Safety:
1) If all of the FS were FAs this year then Byrd would command a top 3-5 salary but not #1 FS salary.
2) However this is not the case and as a result of inflation, growth of league, and increased salary cap, players (as a whole) make more and more money each successive year. Thus a new top FS, LB, CB, DE, etc... Coming into FA will command a top 1-3 salary if not top salary. So Byrd should be and would be top FS $$$ if he hit FA and in few years when one of the other top FS hits the FA his $$$ would be even greater than Byrds.

[better days]

Why do you think that is?

Do you think it's because the Bills are such a well run organization that adequately pays their superstars in attempt to maintain their perennial competitiveness?

Or...

The Bills have paid when they value a player. Obviously they don't value Byrd as Much as Parker does.

Do the Pats* overpay their players? NO!

Byrd can play under the tag or sit at home & lose money.

[jdaltroy5]

The Bills have paid when they value a player. Obviously they don't value Byrd as Much as Parker does.

Do the Pats* overpay their players? NO!

Byrd can play under the tag or sit at home & lose money.
When the Bills win the division every year, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

Until then, I'd like to keep the most talented players that we can.

[kishoph]

When the Bills win the division every year, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

Until then, I'd like to keep the most talented players that we can.

How are they suppose to keep all these players if they cave in to outrageous salary demands every time one of them comes up for a new contract and IMO Byrd wanting to be the highest paid safety, is outrageous. Parker and Byrd are trying to fleece the Bills and I'm glad the Bills didn't give in.

[better days]

How are they suppose to keep all these players if they cave in to outrageous salary demands every time one of them comes up for a new contract and IMO Byrd wanting to be the highest paid safety, is outrageous. Parker and Byrd are trying to fleece the Bills and I'm glad the Bills didn't give in.

I don't think they expected the Bills to give in. I believe that Byrd wants out of Buffalo & would be willing to take less from a different team.

I say make him play under the tag this year & trade him next offseason.

[Mike]

How are they suppose to keep all these players if they cave in to outrageous salary demands every time one of them comes up for a new contract and IMO Byrd wanting to be the highest paid safety, is outrageous. Parker and Byrd are trying to fleece the Bills and I'm glad the Bills didn't give in.

It's not outrageous. Every year player salaries go up and every year fans think the new numbers are outrageous. By any metric, Byrd is one of the Best and in FA he would garner that contract!

[jdaltroy5]

How are they suppose to keep all these players if they cave in to outrageous salary demands every time one of them comes up for a new contract and IMO Byrd wanting to be the highest paid safety, is outrageous. Parker and Byrd are trying to fleece the Bills and I'm glad the Bills didn't give in.
Here's a more important question and the ONLY question we as fans should be asking -

How are we EVER supposed to win when we keep seeing our talented players walk out the door?

[BillsFever21]

It's funny reading these threads. Many of the people who were on the bandwagon of not signing Levitre said we need to save that money to give Byrd an extension because he was more important. Now when that time comes they say he's not worth the money and we need to save it for players who will be FA's 2-3 years from now or for guys who are rotational starters.

We have been playing this game for years and that's why we are always drafting around the Top 10 every season. If you want to talk about overpaying for a player then talk about Mario Williams. Outside of Revis who didn't get a dime of guaranteed money no other defensive player has even came close to matching his 50 million guaranteed and 100 million dollar contract. All that and he's not even the best DE in the league let alone the best defensive player or pass rusher. Hell they gave him QB money. That is fine with some of the same people who says Bryd would be overpaid at 8 million or so a year.

[The King]

I don't think they expected the Bills to give in. I believe that Byrd wants out of Buffalo & would be willing to take less from a different team.

I say make him play under the tag this year & trade him next offseason.

Bingo.

[Generalissimus Gibby]

Illum, its not so much that we can't afford Byrd or that Byrd would prevent us from signing Spiller. No, its that this franchise has a well deserved reputation for doing things on the cheap and when it does spend money it does so to sign garbage players or players that other teams don't want merely so that it can use those players as an excuse to not sign talent.

[SpikedLemonade]

If Byrd decides to not sign his tender, it will give me great comfort while watching the Bills this season to know when the interior of our OL collapses, the middle of our secondary is exploited or another LB is out of position that $25M was not spent.

What jersey number does Unspent Salary Cap wear?

[BillsFever21]

The Bills have paid when they value a player. Obviously they don't value Byrd as Much as Parker does.

Do the Pats* overpay their players? NO!

Byrd can play under the tag or sit at home & lose money.

Why do you continue to use the Patriots as a comparison when it comes to Byrd? You have repeatedly stated that they're really not a very good team and that the only reason for their success over the years was because of cheating and playing in an easy division.

If that was the case and it didn't have anything to do with how they are ran then that is contradicting your theory of their success. If was because of cheating and an easy division then why would you want to follow their model if their success is manufactured? Pick a side because you can't have it both ways.

The Patriots don't sign many of their free agents and are fairly frugal but they continue to be a good team. Most of the time when they let a good player walk they already have somebody groomed who can step in and not miss a beat.

Much of that has to do with good coaching since many of their players didn't perform well after they left the team. They have kept many of their main core players over the years though. They are good at deciding when the player is already past their prime though. When it comes to that point then it becomes a good long-term financial decision.

There have been cases with some players that still had a couple of good years left in them but they let them walk since they wouldn't be worth the money towards the end of the contract. That hurt them in the short-term when it came to trying to win another championship.

They are good at identifying which players have played well because of talent and which have played well because of good coaching and their system. You hae also stated hundreds of times that our defense is talented but has failed only because of bad coaching. If bad coaching was the reason you stated that many of these players didn't perform well then wouldn't somebody like Byrd who still played at a top level be even that much better with some good coaching and defensive system? I guess that logic can only be used for an excuse when the players perform like complete junk.

[Night Train]

Because there is no better way to spend $9 million dollars on improving our team this offseason.

What's the harm of him playing under the tag for year 1 of a new coaching regime ? Coaches usually make a few low key moves ( Lawson, Hughes at LB, Branch at NT ) year 1 and actually learn who can play for them in their new schemes. Then they make mutiple moves in FA and draft with clear eyes before year 2 starts.

Learn your roster and let Byrd " suffer " under the tag while collecting 6.9 Mil. If he stands out, he'll get his $$.

I'd rather have the available room to invest wisely after we actually know what these schemes are all about. If it's Byrd, so be it but quit with the panic button. Way overblown.

[better days]

Why do you continue to use the Patriots as a comparison when it comes to Byrd? You have repeatedly stated that they're really not a very good team and that the only reason for their success over the years was because of cheating and playing in an easy division.

If that was the case and it didn't have anything to do with how they are ran then that is contradicting your theory of their success. If was because of cheating and an easy division then why would you want to follow their model if their success is manufactured? Pick a side because you can't have it both ways.

The Patriots don't sign many of their free agents and are fairly frugal but they continue to be a good team. Most of the time when they let a good player walk they already have somebody groomed who can step in and not miss a beat.

Much of that has to do with good coaching since many of their players didn't perform well after they left the team. They have kept many of their main core players over the years though. They are good at deciding when the player is already past their prime though. When it comes to that point then it becomes a good long-term financial decision.

There have been cases with some players that still had a couple of good years left in them but they let them walk since they wouldn't be worth the money towards the end of the contract. That hurt them in the short-term when it came to trying to win another championship.

They are good at identifying which players have played well because of talent and which have played well because of good coaching and their system. You hae also stated hundreds of times that our defense is talented but has failed only because of bad coaching. If bad coaching was the reason you stated that many of these players didn't perform well then wouldn't somebody like Byrd who still played at a top level be even that much better with some good coaching and defensive system? I guess that logic can only be used for an excuse when the players perform like complete junk.

I have also said the Pats* win because of GOOD Coaching/System & QB play. I think the Bills can win in the same manor. It won't be long now until Brady retires or becomes a shell of his former self. Then Belicheat will retire & the Pats* will become an easy team to beat as the Bills did after Kelly retired.

The Pats* have not drafted well since Pioli left except to draft players like Hernandez at a much better value in a lower round than he should have been drafted because of his character. We will see next year if Sugar Daddy Kraft is willing to go for that in the future.

[X-Era]

Let's set aside the "free safeties aren't big money", "Byrd isn't a gamechanger", "Doesn't fit Pettine's scheme" sillyness for a second and focus purely on the cap space aspect. Why do people think we cannot afford to re-sign Jairus Byrd? People keep saying foolish things like "WHAT IF WE CAN'T RESIGN SPILLER?!?!"

Let's be clear about this: We have more than enough money to re-sign both and any of the other FAs coming down the pipe.

More. Than. Enough.

Keep in mind that most people are perfectly content to keep Byrd at 7M per year, but balk at paying him 9.25 or whatever he supposedly wants. Let's assume that's a correct report for the sake of argument. That's a difference of 2.25 million between what people are ok with and what they are willing to dump one of our best players for. Right now the Bills have 18 million in salary cap space including Byrd's franchise tag.

Now look at some of the Bills' horrendous contracts right now:
Mark Anderson (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/mark-anderson/)
2013 Cap hit: 4Million
2014: 5.5M
2015: 6.5M

This guy is a 3rd down pass rushing "specialist" who provided exactly one sack in 5.5 games before being hurt last year. Unless he turns into an enormous asset, he should be first on the firing line in either 2014 or 15, when it saves us millions in dead cap.

Brad Smith (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/brad-smith/)
2013: 3.75M
2014: 4M

This guy is a crappy wideout and a massive liability at QB. 3.75M for a return specialist is beyond dumb since we supposedly kept McKelvin for the exact same job. Cutting this guy alone pays for the Byrd deal for two seasons.

Fred Jackson (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/fred-jackson/)
2013: 3.7M
2014: 3.7M

Look, I like Fred Jackson. I have one of his TShirts. He's probably my favorite Bill since over the last few seasons. But Spiller has taken his job and he'll be 34 by the time this deal is up. This contract was really a "make up" kind of deal for his late start to the NFL, but is anyone seriously going to be sad if we offer him a vet minimum contract in 2015 and he leaves?

Rian Lindell (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/rian-lindell/)
2013: 3M
2014: 3M
2015: 3.1M

Ok, Lindell has been good to us for a lot of years, but Gailey didn't even trust him in a dome with the game on the line. We've tried drafting his replacement twice. Twice! Let it end!

Erik Pears (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/erik-pears/)
2013: 2.8M
2014: 3.45M

It Hairston does indeed take his spot this offseason, that is way, wayyyy too much to pay for a backup right tackle.

That's 5 bad contracts the Bills can get out from long before Spiller becomes a free agent in 2016. And on top of that, every single one of them is projected as a backup at best this year. Dumping Byrd, a 26 year old multiple all-pro, to avoid cutting overpaid backups is the height of stupidity.

A 6-10 team sitting on 18 million in cap space should not be dumping All-Pros in their prime to save money. Period.

Absolutely can afford him.

The question is whether we SHOULD pay him. That's a different story.

To me it's really about whether a top notch S is worth it. If our defense needs a top 5 paid S I'd do it. If it's not that essential I wouldn't.

Let's not forget though that this is a Pittsburgh GM. This is exactly how they operate.

[better days]

Dude... Obviously your clueless about how negotiations work.

Players ask for a high number, teams offer a low number and eventually they meet somewhere in the middle. Peters did not end up being the highest paid LT in the league. He was posturing, starting high and the Eagles met him at a very reasonable number (conversely the Bills low balled him).

As For Top Paid Safety:
1) If all of the FS were FAs this year then Byrd would command a top 3-5 salary but not #1 FS salary.
2) However this is not the case and as a result of inflation, growth of league, and increased salary cap, players (as a whole) make more and more money each successive year. Thus a new top FS, LB, CB, DE, etc... Coming into FA will command a top 1-3 salary if not top salary. So Byrd should be and would be top FS $$$ if he hit FA and in few years when one of the other top FS hits the FA his $$$ would be even greater than Byrds.

Dude, you don't understand Parker does not negotiate like MOST people. He picks a number & refuses to budge from it or negotiate at all. As I said, his number will be lower for a different team, but Byrd does not want to be in Buffalo so the only way he would be willing to stay is at an INFLATED number.

The Bills did not cave in to that number so I expect to see Byrd not sign his tender or report until he absolutely has to in the hopes the Bills will agree to not tag him next year if he does sign his tender.

[better days]

Absolutely can afford him.

The question is whether we SHOULD pay him. That's a different story.

To me it's really about whether a top notch S is worth it. If our defense needs a top 5 paid S I'd do it. If it's not that essential I wouldn't.

Let's not forget though that this is a Pittsburgh GM. This is exactly how they operate.

By putting the tag on him, it is obvious the Bills were willing to pay Byrd as a top 5 safety.

The problem is Byrd wanted to be paid as the #1 safety in the NFL to remain in Buffalo.

[BillsFever21]

Dude, you don't understand Parker does not negotiate like MOST people. He picks a number & refuses to budge from it or negotiate at all. As I said, his number will be lower for a different team, but Byrd does not want to be in Buffalo so the only way he would be willing to stay is at an INFLATED number.

The Bills did not cave in to that number so I expect to see Byrd not sign his tender or report until he absolutely has to in the hopes the Bills will agree to not tag him next year if he does sign his tender.

If this truly was the case then I wouldn't give in to his demands and give away a top safety in the league without getting any compensation for him. A compensatory pick wouldn't cut it for me. That can also be offset depending on the players you have brought in.

If there wasn't any chance of him signing here and he wanted a clause in his contract that we couldn't tag him again next season then I would tell him tough luck. As of now that is the only bargaining chip with the Bills going nowhere in 2013. We can be a losing team this year with him or can be a losing team without him.

There isn't a chance in hell he will give up over half of his pay and sit out 10 games of the season. I doubt he would sit out one game and would end up reporting towards the end of training camp. He isn't giving up the money this year and he definitely doesn't want to hurt his chances of a big payday next season.

I would tell him he isn't getting a clause and if he doesn't want to be here this season then I would allow his agent to shop him around to another team. If they could come to an agreement with another team who were willing to meet fair value trade demands then he could sign the tender and go play for them this season after we concluded the trade with them.

The last thing I would do is give him and his agent their out clause for next season and let him walk away without any compensation. That would make this front office even worse for not getting anything for him. I would have much rather signed him but if they wanted the clause so they could walk next season then I would play hardball. The ball would be in their court to either play this year without the clause, sit out for 10 weeks or find a team that would be willing to meet the trade demands for him. If we could get a 4th(or maybe even a 3rd round) compensatory pick for him when he walks then they would need to give us a 2nd round pick before I would entertain the idea. Now that the deadline is past the ball is in his court. It's not like we're competing this season.

I would've much rather signed him to an extension but if that also isn't possible next season then we damn well better get something for him. If he wants his clause then I'd give him them options. If not then I'd tell him we'll see you in week 10 and tag you again next season.

[BillsFever21]

By putting the tag on him, it is obvious the Bills were willing to pay Byrd as a top 5 safety.

The problem is Byrd wanted to be paid as the #1 safety in the NFL to remain in Buffalo.

It means they were willing to pay him for at least this season but it doesn't necessarily mean they were serious about giving him a long-term extension with three times as much in guaranteed money. There is a big difference from committing 6.9m to a player for one season then giving him around 20 million in guaranteed money over the next three seasons. They also know that the Bills fan base would've flipped had they not put the franchise tag on him without at least acting like they were seriously attempting to sign him.

This wouldn't be the first instance where a team franchise tagged a player with plans of only keeping him for one season and not willing to give him a long-term extension. This has happened many times during the history of the franchise tag.

It could be that they have a younger player they recently drafted that will take his spot after that season or they are a contending team and they didn't want to lose his production for that year. It could also be a good team that wants to keep the player but simply can't afford to sign him past that season due to other contracts already on the books to key players. With them scenarios it gives the team at least one more season of a good player to try and compete for the playoffs and championship.

[better days]

If this truly was the case then I wouldn't give in to his demands and give away a top safety in the league without getting any compensation for him. A compensatory pick wouldn't cut it for me. That can also be offset depending on the players you have brought in.

If there wasn't any chance of him signing here and he wanted a clause in his contract that we couldn't tag him again next season then I would tell him tough luck. As of now that is the only bargaining chip with the Bills going nowhere in 2013. We can be a losing team this year with him or can be a losing team without him.

There isn't a chance in hell he will give up over half of his pay and sit out 10 games of the season. I doubt he would sit out one game and would end up reporting towards the end of training camp. He isn't giving up the money this year and he definitely doesn't want to hurt his chances of a big payday next season.

I would tell him he isn't getting a clause and if he doesn't want to be here this season then I would allow his agent to shop him around to another team. If they could come to an agreement with another team who were willing to meet fair value trade demands then he could sign the tender and go play for them this season after we concluded the trade with them.

The last thing I would do is give him and his agent their out clause for next season and let him walk away without any compensation. That would make this front office even worse for not getting anything for him. I would have much rather signed him but if they wanted the clause so they could walk next season then I would play hardball. The ball would be in their court to either play this year without the clause, sit out for 10 weeks or find a team that would be willing to meet the trade demands for him. If we could get a 4th(or maybe even a 3rd round) compensatory pick for him when he walks then they would need to give us a 2nd round pick before I would entertain the idea. Now that the deadline is past the ball is in his court. It's not like we're competing this season.

I would've much rather signed him to an extension but if that also isn't possible next season then we damn well better get something for him. If he wants his clause then I'd give him them options. If not then I'd tell him we'll see you in week 10 and tag you again next season.

Often we do not agree on things, but I am in total agreement with this post.

[better days]

It means they were willing to pay him for at least this season but it doesn't necessarily mean they were serious about giving him a long-term extension with three times as much in guaranteed money. There is a big difference from committing 6.9m to a player for one season then giving him around 20 million in guaranteed money over the next three seasons. They also know that the Bills fan base would've flipped had they not put the franchise tag on him without at least acting like they were seriously attempting to sign him.

This wouldn't be the first instance where a team franchise tagged a player with plans of only keeping him for one season and not willing to give him a long-term extension. This has happened many times during the history of the franchise tag.

It could be that they have a younger player they recently drafted that will take his spot after that season or they are a contending team and they didn't want to lose his production for that year. It could also be a good team that wants to keep the player but simply can't afford to sign him past that season due to other contracts already on the books to key players. With them scenarios it gives the team at least one more season of a good player to try and compete for the playoffs and championship.

I think if the Bills did not want to sign Byrd long term & pay him as a top 5 safety, they would have traded him before the last draft.

[GingerP]

By putting the tag on him, it is obvious the Bills were willing to pay Byrd as a top 5 safety.

The problem is Byrd wanted to be paid as the #1 safety in the NFL to remain in Buffalo.

Nobody knows what Byrd wants to be paid other than him and the team. I'm sure the Bills want it out there he is greedy, but all we really know is he wants to be paid more than the Bills are offering.

The reason Byrd doesn't sign the tender now is because he would give up the only negotiation leverage he has remaining. Being paid well for one year isn't his goal, his goal is to get a long-term contract and the security that comes with it. Hard to blame him for that, he has played very well and should be paid well.

At the end of the day, even though he can't get a long-term deal anymore he still has to negotiate to get the best deal for himself. He is going to withhold his services to try and get the Bills to give him a prohibition against being tagged again next year to get him to report. It would be stupid for him to sign otherwise, since his best bet to get a big deal is now in FA next season.

People personalize this too much, it is a negotiation and he wants to be paid. He has earned it with his play, and the Bills place a value on him less than what he wants. He is doing what is best for himself, as the Bills are.

[better days]

Nobody knows what Byrd wants to be paid other than him and the team. I'm sure the Bills want it out there he is greedy, but all we really know is he wants to be paid more than the Bills are offering.

The reason Byrd doesn't sign the tender now is because he would give up the only negotiation leverage he has remaining. Being paid well for one year isn't his goal, his goal is to get a long-term contract and the security that comes with it. Hard to blame him for that, he has played very well and should be paid well.

At the end of the day, even though he can't get a long-term deal anymore he still has to negotiate to get the best deal for himself. He is going to withhold his services to try and get the Bills to give him a prohibition against being tagged again next year to get him to report. It would be stupid for him to sign otherwise, since his best bet to get a big deal is now in FA next season.

People personalize this too much, it is a negotiation and he wants to be paid. He has earned it with his play, and the Bills place a value on him less than what he wants. He is doing what is best for himself, as the Bills are.

Well, I think it is likely Byrd is doing what his agent thinks is best for him. But it may not be the case. If Byrd holds out into training camp & past, he will not learn the defense & he may not play well because of that.
Also, he will not be in football shape & could be injured because of that.

His best chance at a long term contract is to sign the tender & report to camp on day one so he can get in shape & learn the defense. If he plays well this year, the Bills should have no trouble trading him, but if he plays poorly or gets injured because he held out he could be losing out on a LOT of money.

I don't see why the Bills would cave in & give away the right to tag him next year just to get him on the field early this year. It is not like he is the missing piece that will put the Bills in the Super Bowl.

[Mr. Pink]

This team is a joke.

We'll give scrubs like Pukespatrick big money but we refuse to pay pro-bowl talent players what their value is?

Then you have people who think actually paying probably our best defensive player, actually there is no probably about it, market value is a dumb idea on top of it?

The people who think like that, deserve to watch this crap football team year in and year out. If you don't want to pay top talent, you get what we have...a third rate organization that can't compete.

[better days]

This team is a joke.

We'll give scrubs like Pukespatrick big money but we refuse to pay pro-bowl talent players what their value is?

Then you have people who think actually paying probably our best defensive player, actually there is no probably about it, market value is a dumb idea on top of it?

The people who think like that, deserve to watch this crap football team year in and year out. If you don't want to pay top talent, you get what we have...a third rate organization that can't compete.

You overpay to get a FA from another team. You don't overpay a player on your team that you can put the tag on. And the Bills were not the only team in the NFL to tag a player this year, but Byrd is the ONLY player that has not signed his tag.

[GingerP]

His best chance at a long term contract is to sign the tender & report to camp on day one so he can get in shape & learn the defense. If he plays well this year, the Bills should have no trouble trading him, but if he plays poorly or gets injured because he held out he could be losing out on a LOT of money.

I don't see why the Bills would cave in & give away the right to tag him next year just to get him on the field early this year. It is not like he is the missing piece that will put the Bills in the Super Bowl.

I don't think the Bills give in on it either, but it makes a lot of sense for him to try and get it. That is why I don't see him signing until right before the season. The reason they would give in is because by doing so they could get him to sign before camp. They are a better team with him, and they may not like the idea of tagging him next year at a cost of $8.3M. I think they stand pat, but the payoff of reaching unrestricted status next year is worth trying for if you are Byrd.

I doubt he will hurt his value no matter what. I don't buy the idea he will struggle to pick up the new system. Byrd has had 4 DC since coming into the league, so he is used to learning new systems. He has 4 years of film already that shows how good a player he is, his value is pretty much established at this point.

[better days]

I don't think the Bills give in on it either, but it makes a lot of sense for him to try and get it. That is why I don't see him signing until right before the season. The reason they would give in is because by doing so they could get him to sign before camp. They are a better team with him, and they may not like the idea of tagging him next year at a cost of $8.3M. I think they stand pat, but the payoff of reaching unrestricted status next year is worth trying for if you are Byrd.

I doubt he will hurt his value no matter what. I don't buy the idea he will struggle to pick up the new system. Byrd has had 4 DC since coming into the league, so he is used to learning new systems. He has 4 years of film already that shows how good a player he is, his value is pretty much established at this point.

I pretty much agree with you, except Bryd has had some years that were better than others. Could be due to the system, the Coaching, players etc.

One thing we know, Byrd has never played in a system similar to what Pettine is installing. There will be a learning curve & I know Op agrees with me on that.

[Mike]

Dude, you don't understand Parker does not negotiate like MOST people. He picks a number & refuses to budge from it or negotiate at all. As I said, his number will be lower for a different team, but Byrd does not want to be in Buffalo so the only way he would be willing to stay is at an INFLATED number.

The Bills did not cave in to that number so I expect to see Byrd not sign his tender or report until he absolutely has to in the hopes the Bills will agree to not tag him next year if he does sign his tender.

Your dancing in circles:
1) Byrd has said multiple times that he wants to remain a Bill
2) Parker is asking for the going rate and a fair deal
3) Bills can afford it and still pay Spiller, et al
4) FS are becoming valuable players as NFL is pass happy. Unless you want the opposing TE to rip you for 180yrds & 3TDs you better have good Saftys
5) Byrd is a game changer who alone helped us win 50% of wins
6) Byrd has played for some bad coaches and around **** talent and still is one if best FS in NFL
-you put him in a better system with all stars like Reed, Pakamalou, Etc... He could become a HOF

Conclusion: Stop being so Damn cheap and Pay the Man!

This isn't Poz, Whitner type of player. This is a rare talent...

[better days]

Your dancing in circles:
1) Byrd has said multiple times that he wants to remain a Bill
2) Parker is asking for the going rate and a fair deal
3) Bills can afford it and still pay Spiller, et al
4) FS are becoming valuable players as NFL is pass happy. Unless you want the opposing TE to rip you for 180yrds & 3TDs you better have good Saftys
5) Byrd is a game changer who alone helped us win 50% of wins
6) Byrd has played for some bad coaches and around **** talent and still is one if best FS in NFL
-you put him in a better system with all stars like Reed, Pakamalou, Etc... He could become a HOF

Conclusion: Stop being so Damn cheap and Pay the Man!

This isn't Poz, Whitner type of player. This is a rare talent...

I agree Mike, Byrd is BETTER than Poz & Whitner. If he didn't have Parker as an agent, I think a deal could have been done.

But as it now stands, Byrd will have to play this year for the tag unless some team gives the Bills GREAT VALUE for him.

[Mike]

I agree Mike, Byrd is BETTER than Poz & Whitner. If he didn't have Parker as an agent, I think a deal could have been done.

But as it now stands, Byrd will have to play this year for the tag unless some team gives the Bills GREAT VALUE for him.

This is what's going to end up happening:

1) Byrd will sign his tender and one if the two parties will cave a) the bills will cave to his demands if not being tagged next year or b) Byrd will sign agreement regardless
(If Bills have any sense they should Not cave in)

2) Byrd plays out the entire 2013 season

3) In 2014, a) Byrd is a FA and becomes highest payed FS in NFL or b) Bills sign and trade Byrd and he becomes highest payed FS

4) Bills try to find his replacement in the 2014 Draft in first 3 rounds

5) In 2015 Draft Bills spend a late round pick on FS

6) In 2016 Draft Bills spend a 1-2nd round on FS

In FA Bills bring in retread FS to no avail...

All in all, in the end it Will cost more for them to replace Byrd (3 contracts, 3 picks, and opportunity cost of drafting other great players)

[jdaltroy5]

This is what's going to end up happening:

1) Byrd will sign his tender and one if the two parties will cave a) the bills will cave to his demands if not being tagged next year or b) Byrd will sign agreement regardless
(If Bills have any sense they should Not cave in)

2) Byrd plays out the entire 2013 season

3) In 2014, a) Byrd is a FA and becomes highest payed FS in NFL or b) Bills sign and trade Byrd and he becomes highest payed FS

4) Bills try to find his replacement in the 2014 Draft in first 3 rounds

5) In 2015 Draft Bills spend a late round pick on FS

6) In 2016 Draft Bills spend a 1-2nd round on FS

In FA Bills bring in retread FS to no avail...

All in all, in the end it Will cost more for them to replace Byrd (3 contracts, 3 picks, and opportunity cost of drafting other great players)

I mean c'mon, just because that exact same scenario has happened with Clements and Peters, does NOT mean it will happen with Byrd?

Right...