Thurman#1

Too early by far right now to know that' we'll have even more cap $ next year. I'd bet it's quite a bit less than $75 mill. But it should indeed be very healthy again next year. But I expect them to keep it healthy every year. That's how the Panthers operate, and most of the best teams in the league, really.

He hasn't just claimed it. He's been judicious as hell. And when you have $75 mill, and you spend it judiciously, you can bring in a lot of pretty decent players, fill a lot of holes. And when you start talking about division crowns this early, you make people wonder if there are vast cases of Kool-Aid in your storerooms. I like how they're doing things a great deal. But they still have a lot to prove. I expect improvement, though. I think it's legit to expect far fewer areas of obvious weakness this year. But we still have a 2nd year QB and an OL that's never worked together. Playoffs seem possible this year, but far from a sure thing.

There's nothing new about it. Yeah, they're using other teams to develop guys. Teams have been doing that since before there were facemasks. Trading and picking up guys other teams don't want to pay isn't new. It's as old as sports. Your first point seems to de-value the draft. That's the absolute last thing they want to do. They want to build their team with the draft. It's where they will get the overwhelming majority of their core guys. They'll draft them and that way they can teach and develop them from minute one Get two studs each year in the draft? That's ridiculous. It's just a start. They want four or five contributors each year from the draft or UDFAs and the more studs the better. Last year isn't the year you should look at to see how they'll attack the draft. Last year was special, a year when they traded away a ton of guys to develop the draft capital to pick a QB. And yeah they got Edmunds as well, but they wouldn't have been able to get him if they'd traded up to #5 as they'd planned to do before Denver found that their guy was still available there. They aren't going to have that much draft capital available most years. 2017 is probably a better example of what they're likely to be doing, though maybe it'd be safer to say that we haven't seen an ordinary year of their drafting yet. In 2017 they were already collecting trade bait to acquire their QB and they traded back. Tre White wasn't seen - at the time - as a guy with HOF potential. They picked him because he was the BPA. I like what they're doing. An awful lot. But it's the opposite of new. It's the template that most of the smart and consistently successful teams in the league have used for decades. It's the same template used by teams like the Pats, Ravens, Steelers, Giants and Packers. The pillars these teams use are these: 1) Build through the draft 2) Don't get in cap trouble 3) Because you aren't in cap trouble, re-sign your core players to second contracts 4) Fill in the gaps with free agents and trades, but don't bring in the really high-budget guys more than once every four or five years. Do this mostly with low- and medium-priced FAs. 5) Use FA to fill in the obvious gaps and holes so that you can draft for need. 6) Before anything else ... do what's necessary to get yourself a QB, even if it requires a rebuild. There are a few more, but this is the path the Bills are following, and it's the smartest way. What it isn't ... is new. It's old. But not easy. So far they appear to be doing it right, though they still have a lot to prove.

As thoroughly wrong a post as I've ever seen. Eugene Parker, not Drew Rosenhaus, was Peters' agent. And Parker's method was to say what he wanted, and to not change, knowing that he was very very good at picking a number someone would pay. Which happened in the Peters case. Peters, a hall-of-gamer soon, left Buffalo because they wouldn't pay him what he wanted and what he absolutely deserved.

Rapaport was first and right, both. And it was almost certainly the Steelers who leaked, to try to put pressure on the Bills to go through with it and to maybe try to draw in an extra suitor or two thinking there was a serious suitor and that it might end soon. The fact that he went to Oakland, not exactly NYC or Chicago and not a team that looks like it will win this year, and not a team with a terrific QB already proven and in place IMHO makes it look very likely that what Beane thought was right ... that if they'd worked out a deal on money there would have been no problems with Brown reporting.

Yup. Many did laugh. The slower ones. The ones who didn't recognize a rebuild, in which we got a possible franchise QB. The Steelers, though, aren't rebuilding. They're in a window where they've got a very short few more years with Roethlisberger to try to win a championship.

I didn't think Carucci said that it came down to money, so I just went back and re-read it. He didn't say that at all. All he said was that parallel negotiations were ongoing, and that "it stands to reason that 'the larger the payout for Brown, the lower the compensation the team would be willing to give in order to reduce the risk, and vice versa.' " But that neither indicates a source on that specific part of this, nor a declaration that money was the problem. It also doesn't indicate that both sides of the negotiations were in depth. They could've talked a lot with the Steelers and on introductory convo with Rosenhaus declaring interest. It doesn't say.

No particular reason to think this. And plenty of reason to think the opposite. Here's an excerpt from yesterday's Carucci article. "Neither Beane nor anyone from the Bills spoke directly with Brown. Beane has never met him, so there is no way of truly knowing from the Bills’ end how he feels about the team or Buffalo. "However, sources said the Bills were confident if they met his financial demand and were able to make the trade, Brown would have happily joined them. Despite speculation that their inability to acquire Brown doesn’t bode well for their efforts to sign players during the NFL’s unrestricted free-agent period that begins Wednesday, the Bills believe what was true before about signing players in the open market remains true: money talks." https://buffalonews.com/2019/03/08/buffalo-bills-antonio-brown-pittsburgh-steelers-brandon-beane-nfl-football/

It shouldn't. It's in line with what Carucci wrote yesterday in the News.

It's "not a fineable offense"? Yeah, which offenses are fineable? I've yet to be charged a penny for anything here. And yeah, a link to a rumor is not proof of anything. On the other hand, a link to a journalist with a source has some value. But an inability to link to anything .... People's opinions here are worth as much as LaCanfora? Yeah, um, right. When people on here say they have facts and can't back it up and that goes on and on it all becomes a game of chinese whispers. Don't back up your rumor and you won't be believed, and reasonably so. Don't have anything to back it up? Own that. It raises the level of the discussions here vastly when things are backed up with links.

It was on here, as a rumor. Someone credited it to Aditi Kinkhabwala's twitter, but when I checked her feed yesterday, nothing remotely like that was there. It was probably started on here. But CuddyDark has added a third-rounder to what was talked about on these boards. What was reported (sourcelessly) on the thread I was reading yesterday was only a switch of the 1sts. There's never even been a legitimate source saying they came to final terms, so it looks like another baseless rumor.

He's a mod. And he's right, you're in the wrong here. If you want your posts believed, back them up. If you can't, they generally won't be believed. It's not our job to check your (or anyone's) unsubstantiated rumors. "Check it yourself" is a common dodge for people who can't back things up. If I were to check every post where people say that and won't back it up, probably around 20% would turn out to be correct.

I could easily be wrong on this, but Jones seems to take a lot more punishment than Brown. I think he's going to start wearing out. Soon. No thanks.

Thing that stuck out for me was this. "The teams correctly assume that the answers they seek lie hidden inside the players, and yet the combine gives them all just 15-minute interviews amid the circus of other activity. Some teams would rather the entire week be devoted to interviews, along with the invaluable medicals exams. Franchises are forever fumbling in the dark for clues. They all try a forever-changing system of interrogations, mock-therapy sessions and psych evals. A few, like the Colts and the Patriots, have utilized non-football leadership and character experts who are fully integrated into their facility and staff. Most, however, have not. "When I asked around in Indy, I was told the reason is shockingly simple: many coaches believe their own myth about being leaders of men and experts in the realms of character and motivation. They cannot admit in public that they really don't know much about any of those things. Maybe in every NFL facility there is a person or a group of people who could win games, maybe even The Game, if the people above them could stop preening long enough to listen. "Since the interviews are where a team stands to gain the most insight, I wondered what it is possible to learn in 15 minutes -- or at least what would be possible if you got a trained professional and didn't leave this up to coaches and general managers. I decided to get a psychological evaluation. A few calls later, I was hooked up with Dana Sinclair, who has done the tests for the Lions, Seahawks and, for years, the Colts. She worked for Dungy and Jim Caldwell, and then she left, and now the team has hired a Green Beret, still looking for different ways to answer the same question." Yet another way the Pats find to get a small advantage. This isn't Belichick, you can bet, it's their whole brain trust working together and well, and you can bet that Belichick heard it and immediately agreed. There's more in the story about his own evaluation as conducted by a (non-NFL) pro and how very accurate it was. Damn it. Why aren't we doing this, next year, if not this year.

Just isn't particularly true. The most important thing is money. Not just for Buffalo but for everybody. And what is a debacle about it? They kicked the tires, got the values that would be necessary and the money AB would require - neither one of which would have been available without entering negotiations with the Steelers - and then decided it wasn't worth it. According to Carucci they never spoke to AB himself in any way but had spoken to his agent and were very confident that if they'd done the trade and successfully re-negged Brown, necessary to make the trade of course, that he would have reported. The Steelers were the ones who broke it to Rapoport, not the Bills. It may have hit Bills fans hard but it's no debacle. "Despite speculation that their inability to acquire Brown doesn’t bode well for their efforts to sign players during the NFL’s unrestricted free-agent period that begins Wednesday, the Bills believe what was true before about signing players in the open market remains true: money talks. "It has been the Bills’ experience that there are certain players who prefer to play in larger markets and, if contract offers are equal, will choose those teams. The Bills also have found there are some who would rather play in smaller markets. "Still, money is always the largest factor in signing free agents." https://buffalonews.com/2019/03/08/buffalo-bills-antonio-brown-pittsburgh-steelers-brandon-beane-nfl-football/

He didn't report a done deal. I believe the word he used was "likely". On twitter, "closing in on a deal." In a different tweet, "close to being done."

Yeah, what Rapaport reported was correct. Mebbe the Steelers were the ones to call him, probably hoping for one last offer out of left-field?

Kinkhabwala: "From what I was told a little bit ago, the Steelers have said they are accepting bids up until Friday morning, that as Ian has said, they're closing in. I was told earlier today that the Bills seemingly had the best offer but that the Steelers were going to keep their word, that they are accepting bids until tomorrow morning." http://www.nfl.com/videos/buffalo-bills/0ap3000001021493/Kinkhabwala-explains-what-kind-of-player-the-Bills-would-get-with-A-B

There is no salary min this year. They have to spend 89% (in cash) over a four-year period. They don't have to worry about this, especially as it's possible to spend cash in one year that goes well over the cap. The #1 team in cash spending this year, the Bears, spent around $233 mill, though the salary cap was only $177.2. That's $55 million over the cap. Eight teams spent more than $200 million. https://overthecap.com/cash-spending/ and click on 2018. This isn't going to be a problem. So take them at their word and expect them to spend judiciously and maybe front-load a few contracts.

First, this is only a rumor of a guess. And second, even if it happens, Rosen could still very easily be a tremendous success elsewhere. It'll be another two to three years before you get to gloat about this. If you do.

"Spending requirements "There is a minimum amount of money that a team can put towards their caps. All 32 teams are required to spend at least 89 percent of their caps (which this year is $157.7 M). This is called the minimum cash spend requirement, also known as the 89 percent rule. "Teams don’t have to spend their 89 percent every year, however. This requirement must be the average amount spent over the four year spending period. The current spending period started in 2017 and will continue through 2020. "In other words, the Bengals could have to spend 88 percent of their cap last year and this year, but would have to spend at least 90 percent over the next two years." https://www.cincyjungle.com/2018/9/6/17600618/nfl-salary-cap-2018-everything-to-know-about-salaries Also important to know that if a guy gets a 4 year contract this year from Buffalo with a $10 mill signing bonus this year and a $5 mill 2019 salary, his 2019 salary cap hit will be $7.5 mill ((1/4 his bonus) plus his salary). But the Bills cash spend will be $15 mill this year on him. Meaning it isn't tough to spend a bunch of cash in any given year. You can actually spend more than 100% of the salary cap in cash, and plenty of teams do that. For instance, last year the Bears led the league in cash spending, putting out $233 mill. To remind you, the salary cap was $177.2 mill. https://overthecap.com/cash-spending/ Posts in this thread have referred to front-loading contracts, and in terms of cash spending, most contracts are front-loaded. And the posters are right that doing so would ameliorate the problem. More, the figures are not bad at all. 2017 salary cap: $167 mill Bills 2017 active cash spending: $138.576 mill Bills 2017 total cash spending: $149.948 mill 2018 salary cap: $177.2 mill Bills 2018 active cash spending: $129.057 mill Bills 2018 total cash spending: $156,903 mill 2019 salary cap: projected at $187 - $191.1 mill Bills 2019 active cash spending (so far): $88.8 mill Bills total cash spending (so far): $88.8 mill https://overthecap.com/cash-spending/ Total cash spending is the important number. And as you can see, the problem is this year. And we're going to be spending a bunch more yet this year. How much? Hard to know, but say that it's $50 mill in cap, including $30 mill in 2019 salaries and $40 mill in bonuses. And yeah, that doesn't add up, for the reasons explained above. But if that ended up being it, it would cost $50 mill against the cap and $70 mill in cash. Problem pretty much gone. This isn't going to put any real pressure on them at all. Think "judicious."

In 2017 they ended the season around $10 mill under the cap. $11.198 precisely. Same with last year. $9.186 mill. https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/cap/2017/ https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/cap/2018/ Why are they under the threshold? Because they're about $75 mill under this year. Spend about $40 to $50 mill this year and they're easily back under. This simply isn't a problem. And in case people don't quite get that quote ... everyone has to spend 89% ... when everything is added up after the end of the fourth year. It's NOT that we have to spend 89% every year. Not going to be a problem, especially as next year, 2020, is when you can start to re-negotiate and lengthen contracts that finish up in 2021, guys like Zay, Poyer, Dawkins, Milano, McKenzie, Duke Williams, Tre ...

It was the teams, not the players, who wanted comp picks so they could save money on FAs and yet get something back. And nearly every rule can be said to help the best teams. It's not that the rules are built to do that. It's that the best teams do a better job of handling the rules in a way that maximizes benefits for their teams.

All about the Buffalo Bills. Allen's certainly a large part of that, but no, it's not all about Allen.

If you turn down multi-million dollar jobs because your wife tells you to ... when you're already a multimillionaire and have a very decent shot at seeing another multimillion dollar offer from someone else in the near future ... you're just fine. An ordinary guy.