Bills Release Mark Anderson

[feldspar]

Bad month for DEs named Anderson. - CIN cut the Jamaal version recently.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...innati-bengals

Did you know that there are currently at least 36 players in the NFL with the last name Brown? That's more than 1 per team. I foresee a bad day for guys named Brown on the horizon.

At least 42 guys named Smith...hopefully there is a bad day for a guy that goes by the first name Brad pretty soon. That'll be a good day for me.

Forget about keeping up with the Jones'...there are only 30 of them.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Did you know that there are currently at least 36 players in the NFL with the last name Brown? That's more than 1 per team. I foresee a bad day for guys named Brown on the horizon.

At least 42 guys named Smith...hopefully there is a bad day for a guy that goes by the first name Brad pretty soon. That'll be a good day for me.

Forget about keeping up with the Jones'...there are only 30 of them.

We could be starting five Williams this year. Five.​

[kishoph]

I'm disappointed that Anderson didn't work out, but I'm glad the Bills let him go and didn't feel the need to keep him because he was a high priced FA. I wasn't excited about the talk of keeping Anderson as a "situational pass rusher."

[stuckincincy]

I'm disappointed that Anderson didn't work out, but I'm glad the Bills let him go and didn't feel the need to keep him because he was a high priced FA. I wasn't excited about the talk of keeping Anderson as a "situational pass rusher."

I've always felt that the best situational pass rusher is a blitzing cornerback or safety.

Anderson was a roll of the dice that didn't pan out as well as expected, but I credit the Bills for trying. Happens to most clubs time to time, IMO.

[Saratoga Slim]

Anderson was a roll of the dice that didn't pan out as well as expected, but I credit the Bills for trying. Happens to most clubs time to time, IMO.

I agree. The comments in this thread are odd. Signing Anderson didn't put us against the cap and prevent us from signing anyone else. And he was coming off a very solid, double digit sack year. Sure, he hadn't shown a ton of consistency previously, but Ralph spent some cash on the gamble that he might. And you guys have a
problem with that? You'd rather that Ralph just sat on the cash?

[GingerP]

When is the last day that we can spend money on new contracts and have that count towards THIS year?

I believe if you sign a player to an extension before the last day of the regular season, part of his bonus money is allocated to the current season. If you up his salary, it is split based on the number of weeks in the season. For instance, if you sign a player to an extension after 7 weeks, his old salary is prorated for 7 weeks (out of 17) and his new salary is prorated for 10.

It isn't a big deal anyway, as teams can carry over cap room just by providing the league notice they want to do so. The only way it doesn't carry over is if the team doesn't want it to.

[GingerP]

I've always felt that the best situational pass rusher is a blitzing cornerback or safety.

Anderson was a roll of the dice that didn't pan out as well as expected, but I credit the Bills for trying. Happens to most clubs time to time, IMO.

I don't think it is a bad move to cut their losses because it didn't work out. I do think they should have addressed the position opposite Williams better. Right now, they are probably going to start Hughes or Lawson opposite Williams. Hughes is a bum and Lawson isn't a great pass rusher. They Bills are likely going to struggle to generate any pass rush from the outside, as teams are going to slide protection toward Williams.

[stuckincincy]

I don't think it is a bad move to cut their losses because it didn't work out. I do think they should have addressed the position opposite Williams better. Right now, they are probably going to start Hughes or Lawson opposite Williams. Hughes is a bum and Lawson isn't a great pass rusher. They Bills are likely going to struggle to generate any pass rush from the outside, as teams are going to slide protection toward Williams.

I'm hoping whoever mans the end spots do a decent job of contain. It seems to me, that more and more clubs are emphasizing the interior rush to get quick pressure on the qb in this age of "no touch'em" receivers.

[Thief]

Only makes sense if we can roll over the money to next year and actually spend it. Otherwise 4 million on a situational pass rusher, or depth, is better then 4 million in a dying 90 yr olds pocket.

[ublinkwescore]

Refersh my memory, did you like the EJ pick? You haven't mentioned it a hundred times.

He hates all our qbs... always has. I think he just wants to see the rbs take the snaps from now on and run reverses & laterals.

[TacklingDummy]

He hates all our qbs... always has. I think he just wants to see the rbs take the snaps from now on and run reverses & laterals.

Lets take a look at this statement...

Holcomb
Johnson
Bledsoe
Losman
Fitzpatrick
Edwards
Brohm
Collins
Van Pelt
Hobert

Yep You are rate, I hated them all because they all sucked.

2 Years we can add Manuel to the list. That's unless he proves his doubters wrong.

People wonder why this team has sucked for so long. Take a look at the Toilet Paper list.

[mayotm]

Lets take a look at this statement...

Holcomb
Johnson
Bledsoe
Losman
Fitzpatrick
Edwards
Brohm
Collins
Van Pelt
Hobert

Yep You are rate, I hated them all because they all sucked.

2 Years we can add Manuel to the list. That's unless he proves his doubters wrong.

People wonder why this team has sucked for so long. Take a look at the Toilet Paper list.

It's a pathetic list. No doubt about that. However, that list has nothing to do with Manuel succeeding or not. Time will tell.

[djjimkelly]

it tells me he cant play DE in this scheme and isnt an OLB thats my take

or of course injury

[TacklingDummy]

It's a pathetic list. No doubt about that. However, that list has nothing to do with Manuel succeeding or not. Time will tell.

Agreed.

I don't think he will succeed but he has a chance to prove me wrong and I hope he does.

But I won't be surprised at all when he turns out to be just another QB bum.

[EDS]

I agree. The comments in this thread are odd. Signing Anderson didn't put us against the cap and prevent us from signing anyone else. And he was coming off a very solid, double digit sack year. Sure, he hadn't shown a ton of consistency previously, but Ralph spent some cash on the gamble that he might. And you guys have a
problem with that? You'd rather that Ralph just sat on the cash?

I would rather Ralph "waste" the money signing Byrd - a proven playmaker and one of the few pro bowl players drafted by the organization in the last decade. But no, the Bills need to give unreasonably large contracts to unproven or inconsistent mid-level vets such as Kelsay, Fitz, Anderson, Lawson, etc.

The Bills front office has shown true genius in terms of the value that they get on the field from these outsized contracts.

[TacklingDummy]

I would rather Ralph "waste" the money signing Byrd - a proven playmaker and one of the few pro bowl players drafted by the organization in the last decade. But no, the Bills need to give unreasonably large contracts to unproven or inconsistent mid-level vets such as Kelsay, Fitz, Anderson, Lawson, etc.

The Bills front office has shown true genius in terms of the value that they get on the field from these outsized contracts.

Maybe the $4 Million they are saving by not paying Anderson will go towards keeping Byrd.

[EDS]

Maybe the $4 Million they are saving by not paying Anderson will go towards keeping Byrd.

Well, since they were so tight up against the cap to begin with . . .

[TacklingDummy]

Well, since they were so tight up against the cap to begin with . . .

Im talking real money, not cap money.
It's $4 Million real spendable money they can give to Byrd compared to made up monopoly money.