Thurman#1

It could come down to that question. But few people or nobody has responded to the other section of the interview I transcribed about Newton's consistent mechanical problems and fixes. Simms says that Cam has had the same sort of mechanical issues he's having now many times during his career for a game or two or three. But that then he's consistently been able to quickly fix the problem when it's addressed and get back to his regular mechanics and his regular performance level. If that happens and he is back to normal next week, we won't be able to sell out to stop the run, confident that Cam can't beat us.

I just went and did research on it. It's a thing I'd never heard of called Termination Pay. If a veteran with four or more accrued seasons who is on the roster for the first game of that season is cut, the rest of his salary is guaranteed. There are a few lawyer-language exceptions. Antonio Brown didn't get his from the Raiders because they claimed he didn't give good-faith effort. It's Article 30 in the CBA. Here's the section about eligibility: "(a) Any player who has completed the season in which his fourth year or more of credited service under the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle Retirement Plan has been earned shall be eligible for Termination Pay under this Article if: (1) He is released after his Club’s first regular season game; and (2) He has made the Active/Inactive List of his Club on or after the date of his Club’s first regular season game."

You're right, I'm wrong. I'd never heard of that before. Interesting to learn.

Why would you think that the money for the games he didn't play in would not be available to the Bills on the cap if they cut him? Murphy's salary is NOT guaranteed.

Just the opposite. People want to pretend it's a coincidence that the LBs are playing more poorly against the run this year. But it was in fact wildly obvious that would happen. It was predicted by many, including me, the instant Star opted out, and it's come to pass. Star is far more than serviceable, he's very good. People who go by stats entirely miss Star's value. He frees up the LBs to look great by eating blocks. He'll never be a pass rusher, which is why his salary isn't much higher. He's a guy you want in only on run downs, but on those run downs he makes the whole defense much more effective against the run. You're right that correlation doesn't equal causality. But that's irrelevant. We don't need to confuse them here, the Bills have told us over and over again that Star is a cause and that the effects of having him out there are major and noticeable. He's been a major part of a very very successful defense and the Bills have told you that he's a major reason for that. McDermott knows what his defense needs a ton better than you do. Or me, for that matter. But bringing in a guy they had extensive experience with, paying him more than he'd be worth in other schemes that don't value space eaters, and then guaranteeing his salary the next year and a half tell you very clearly what's going on here, which is that he's a guy they want here. For now and the future. And they don't feel that way because he's "average to below average" or that he's "done nothing but support that decision," both ridiculous statements. Certainly possible they'll get rid of him before 2022 if his game has regressed. If it hasn't, it's quite unlikely. After they guaranteed much of his salary for that year, he would cost $5.1 mill in dead money to cut before the 2022 season. By cutting him they'd save $6.15 mill in salary, a $350K roster bonus, a $250K workout bonus and a $350K Game active bonus if he's active all 16 games. So they'd save $7.1 mill but acquire $5.1 mill in dead money. Cut a guy who they were happy enough with that before the season they guaranteed a year and a half of salary ... all to save $2 mill. In a year when the cap will go back up and when the Bills right now have a projected $103 mill available under the cap. Very unlikely. Bottom line is you may not like him. But they do.

I think the cap saving is even slightly less than that. $4.05 M salary $1.0 M roster bonus $100K workout bonus ... so we'd get out of paying $5.15M, but ... We'd be hit with $1.6 M in dead money. So the total saved would be $3.65 M ... ... unless he collects his contractual Pro Bowl bonus of $400K, and if he makes the Pro Bowl he'll have very easily been worth $4.05 M You're right that $3.65M is not a lot of space and that we wouldn't get a comp pick, and that we would almost certainly have to spend yet more money to bring in an FA to replace him. The OP doesn't make any real sense.

What happened against the Jets is Milano and Edmunds both played a lot in the second half. This defense always plays better when these guys are next to each other.

That's ridiculous. There's nobody ready to replace him. I suppose you're right that maybe they could draft someone but the idea that they should use one of their top couple of picks on a safety to play in 2021 instead of say a pass rusher or an LB, just to save $3.6 mill is just seriously bizarre. If we did cut him we'd have to bring in a safety as an FA, which would cost money.

You're a Londoner, Bill? Great city. I've visited twice. My favorite time there was when I visited at around age 15 and punk and post-punk were big there and you couldn't see a lot of good live music in Albany, NY as a 15 year-old. I saw Squeeze and Wreckless Eric live, The Damned, and a few others. Came home with about 50 vinyl albums of new bands I hadn't heard of before. Walked past Roger Bannister's house, which was huge for me. Loved London. Spent 20 years in Tokyo, which I absolutely loved as well. Now I'm in a smaller Japanese city.

Big Coben fan here. He writes good stuff.

The Pats - Bills content starts around 42:00. Some excerpts: Burmeister: What's going on with Cam Newton? Simms: Well, he's off. No doubt about that. Simms argues that the Pats last week were a terrible matchup against the Niners, as the Niners are "a run-first-centric team" and Shanahan's the run genius of football. And the Patriots on defense are built to stop passing offenses. He argues Belichick tries to scare you out of runs by packing the box, but then backs away, and some of the eight guys in the box are littler guys than are usually up there and wouldn't be especially effective against the run. Simms: "What you've got to do is go, ' Oh, OK, we're outnumbered in the box, so what, that guy's 195 pounds, that guy's 205 pounds, our right guard can block both of them with his right arm.' " And Shanahan stuck with the run. Asked what he thought were the Pats biggest offensive problems he said offensive line injuries and post-COVID Cam hasn't been the same after missing three weeks of football. They both thought his motion is off right now. But what made me a bit worried is something Simms said about that. Simms: "[Newton] gets into this almost once a year his whole career. ... where his front shoulder gets way high in the air." Goes on to say (quite a bit later) that Newton has had this problem many times before for a week or two or three and then either he or a coach figures it out and corrects it and he starts playing better again. ... and ... Simms: "And now they've got Buffalo this week, and that's the perfect team for them. Again, matchups. ... The Bills can't stop the run and they can't run the ball, so they have to throw it every play. Perfect for New England. So don't be shocked if New England upset Buffalo this week." And later, his preview of the game: He and Florio both pick the Pats, saying the Bills strength is passing and the Pats strength is stopping the pass, and that on offense the Pats strength is running while the Bills weakness is stopping the run. Makes some sense. If they're right, we'd better do a good job in the run game on both sides of the ball. Hopefully Feliciano's return will make a real difference. Whattya think?

Yeah, taxes are higher. More opportunity too, though. Fair enough that people who don't live in big cities aren't necessarily all that impressed by them. The ones that are impressed tend to move there, and that's why the population in our biggest cities and cities all over the world is rising. If you don't like cities, you'll tend to end up elsewhere still not liking cities, So yeah, people who don't live in them don't like them. It's like saying people who regularly visit bakeries and buy cakes aren't as much into ice cream as those who frequent Baskin-Robbins. True, but it doesn't show much.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/quarterback/ Here's a listing of QBs ranked by average salary. Who of the top ten is overpaid? You shouldn't overpay them. But overpaying is all but impossible these days. A great QB really is worth what you pay him. The trick is to not give a high salary to a QB who won't play very very well. Guys like Carr put you in a spot because sometimes he seems worth it and other times not. The Goff and Wentz deals had looked questionable. Now they look good, though Philly has other problems. People blame teams that backtrack on QB salaries, but mostly it's just bad roster building. Yes, it's harder to have success when you're paying your QB a lot. Know what's tougher? Having success while your QB sucks. If you get a guy, you have to pay him. Who are the best teams in the league? The Steelers, Chiefs, Packers and Seahawks? Who after that? The Titans, Bucs, Saints, Ravens, Bills, and Rams, maybe? Yeah, a few teams there have guys on rookie contracts, but most are paying QBs very big or huge money, and the ones who have young QBs look like they will pay those guys when it's time.

Cutting and trading him would have the same cap impact for the Bills. That's not true of guys whose salaries are guaranteed, but the Murphy's guarantee has long been paid. In either case, the unamortized signing bonus due will go into dead cap. The Bills will save the salary he's due and his Per Game Active Bonus, and they would save this whether he's traded or cut. The roughly $3.5 mill we'd save (not counting that whoever replaces him on the roster would have a cost that should be subtracted from that $3.5 mill to understand the financial impact of the move) wouldn't be nothing, but IMO it's not worth dumping if you get nothing back. They're hoping to get something, if the report is true.

... and has been playing injured. It isn't all that difficult to diagnose a screen pass even if it's not thrown. The QB will look at it and the RB/WR/TE will be trying to find space and looking back at him, and some linemen will be getting out in front of it. People over-estimate how difficult it is to watch film. It's pretty easy. It's mostly very very easy. That's not what coaches do that brings them the big bucks. The hard part of what they do is trying to figure out what the opponent will do before they do it. That's the stuff that's tough. Figuring out what they did after they did it, when you have film, just isn't all that difficult generally.

Yup.

It's interesting. A quick check of his snap counts shows he played less than 200 snaps on defense last year in KC, 160 to be precise. Some of that relates to his four-game suspension, but still, 160 is not a lot by any standard. I'm curious to see what they get out of him. You're probably not the only one, but the problem they're facing and talking about is endemic to any grading system you can think of. When a guy has two extremely good games it's absolutely going to warp things a lot, especially when he is suspended four games and most especially when he has only 160 snaps total to look at. That conversation totally made sense and any grading system would have the same concerns.

Wishful thinking till we tamp the dirt down. Agreed it's not monumental, but it's absolutely still very very big. This is far more than another division game. Far more. And like it or not, saying "when we win" is kidding yourself. It's "if we win." Put up a couple of wins against the Pats and then and only then will playing them be just another game.

Bwah ha ha ha ha. Oh, this is so precious. I feel like I did watching my little two year old fall into a mud puddle as she tried to walk for the first time.

Star has done his job consistently, and has proved to be a very good signing. He'll be here the whole length of his contract unless they manage to draft at least one excellent space eating 1-tech. And the defense will be "unexplainably" better. The reason the dead cap hit is large is that the Bills, in exchange for the $1.75 mill cut from his $50 mill salary, guaranteed a year and a half of his salary. They did this because they want him here.

Funny, I thought he looked great right from the start. Yeah, he was terrific right from carry one. A six yard run, a three yard catch, a 17 yard catch and another six yard run. It's not that he needs carries. He's probably just starting to figure things out.

Some people seem to think that anytime a guy gets blocked it means he's out of position. T'ain't so. As many have pointed out, the folks who know, like Cover One, and do extensive and intelligent films study say he's starting to get better and that he wasn't in the wrong places and time. It's typical, though. Finding a scapegoat and grabbing the pitchforks seems to be the signature move for a lot of fans on these boards.

If those are the worst plays he probably had a pretty good game. About five or six of those are really good examples of how the DL is letting him down. Two of them are hands plays. And nearly all of them are very early in the game. Not a single one in the second half except the tough dropped pass. To me when a guy as motivated as you clearly are to make him look bad can't do any better than this, it's hopeful.

Very very likely a jump in performance. It's what happens with nearly any team getting back multiple injured guys, unless other guys get injured in their places. Particularly as the injured guys are crucial and gathered together among certain position groups. The question will likely be how much of one. Big or small?

Please Ed is not responsible for destroying the Pats. That's up to the whole Bills team. Not certain about Ed yet? That's on you. What he needs to do is be healthy and play like a healthy Ed Oliver.