Hapless Bills Fan
-
Posts
48,720 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Hapless Bills Fan
-
-
If they're really wanting to put on a push to extend Dareus, it suddenly makes more sense that they're cutting vet backups and collecting the pennies in a jar.
If nothing else it's like "D, give us a break here, we got out the broom and cleared as much cap room as we could"
@spotrac: #Bills have now cleared $15.01M in overall 2015 cap space in the past 2 days, most in the NFL. http://t.co/jbqH2Fg0wL
That's a lot of pennies. One and a half of these
-
IMO, Hogan, Goodwin, Thigpen, and Easley, all have trade value. They might all be on the block, depending on what the offer is.
Goodwin's trade value goes with his ribs. If they're broken, so's his value right now
-
That clear responsibility looks good in the press conference, but what about the process to resolve a conflict? Kryk correctly pointed that out. And don't you think that the roles and responsibilities are already muddy with Rex bringing the Jets guys he likes and Whaley lobbying EJ for the starting job?
I have a hunch this isn't the last such incident.
If there was a conflict, looks to me like it got resolved. No, don't think the roles and responsibilities are too muddy - a good GM will try to align closely with what the coach wants and needs in personnel, and when it comes to low-level players "guys we know" are almost always given a look-see. The problem arises if they are kept around in lieu of someone better 'cuz they're "coach's picks", but do you see that as happening? With whom? Looks to me as though most of Ryan's look-see guys came saw and left.
The GM will also lobby the coach to give a player he IDs as talented a fair shot. Again, the problem arises only if the GM's guy is given a shot ahead of someone arguably better. Do you see that happening? With whom? EJ is not our starter and to most of us armchair evaluators, they picked the guy who showed the best.
I agree it likely won't be the last such incident if Pegula doesn't round up the troups and tell them to air out their differences when their input is sought, understand what person has decision making authority, and once the decision is reached, STFU
-
But isn't that the whole issue with graham's account? His sources insist that Whaley acted outside normal operating protocol. Just because Whaley ran the cut by Pegula doesn't mean he didn't bypassother channels that are usually in the loop.
That's why I think the Kryk article is spot on. Dashed line reporting responsibilities only work in well established organizations where there are clear lines of communication and accountability. They rarely work where the fiefdoms vie for control.
OK, I read the Kryk article but I must have missed it. What "dashed line" reporting responsibilities did Kryk identify that were bypassed?
I thought the Brandon did a nice job of laying out roles and responsibilities during the 14 Jan introductory presser. Whaley is GM and is responsible for the 53 man roster. Rex is responsible for the game day roster. Brandon is responsible for football ops. All report to the Pegulas. Basically what I read Kryk as advocating was the hiring of a football czar to whom all 3 would report - which essentially sounds to me like handing off responsibility from the Pegulas to Mr Czar, whomever he might be.
-
not saying it was an "all money" decision, but it became a factor once it became apparent that Tyrod had something and EJ was showing signs of improving. ... that said, there were some in organization who were very much down on EJ in the early days of camp.
jw
Thanks for your input, John. Did EJ convert them, or are they still down?
-
Great read, Thanks Yolo!
Find myself really liking Tyler Dunne. But then I like a lot of Graham's articles too when he isn't on Twitter
-
So it looks like the Bills cut Fred for Bryce gdamn Brown (Hitler called it). And how is Nick O'Leary still on this team? Hogan and 'quise still here, Deonte and Andre cut. Red Bryant gone, yet the Bills still have two open roster spots (??). On the plus side, my boy AJ Tarpley survived, so good for him. Weirdest cutdown I've ever seen from OBD.
I think it means Dealer Doug isn't finished yet
-
Not sure if that's the case. There was a split between Cassel and Tyrod heading into last weekend. Some wanted one, others wanted the other. It came down to Rex breaking the deadlock by going with Tyrod. Once Tyrod was named the starter, then it became evident that Cassel's contract was too expensive for a backup job -- though some who supported Tyrod pushed in part for Tyrod by knowing it would lead to Cassel's departure..
So, by Wednesday, there were discussions but no decision made on what to do with Cassel. And the decision was not dependent on how Simms did in the preseason game. And then it reached the point where Cassel was cut today.
Check my timeline. These are all things that I've tweeted.
I have also tweeted that I have concerns about Tyrod maintaining his consistency once the season begins. I say that, because he's never had an NFL start. And I was tweeting this in the face of everyone going ga-ga over Tyrod during the Cleveland preseason game. I like Tyrod. I think he earned the job and has a chance to be a dynamic player.
That doesn't mean I'm fully and completely sold on the guy as being good.
I was asked if I wanted a helping of crow for putting forward my view that I thought we should keep Cassel, even if he's #3. Mmmm, not in this case, it's just my opinion, the Bills obviously differ. But I too have the concern that Tyrod who looked great against a vanilla PS defense may stumble after teams get some film on him - wouldn't be the 1st or 2nd time that's happened to a Bills QB who looked good through 5 games.
Can you comment on what would be the motivation of guys to push for Tyrod because they want to move Cassel down the road? I hope that's because they're "all in" with Tyrod and EJ and not because they're trying to save $$
-
Brown is a guy Whaley liked long before they made that trade with Philadelphia. And now they're working on dealing him? Chip Kelly is probably laughing over this news.
I doubt it. Chip Kelly himself is the master of "that was Then, this is Now" and "what have you done for me right here recently?"
As the roster changes, the prioritization of players change - that's not such a tough concept for NFL GMs to grasp.
-
Should we start a money pool on how long it is before we hear that the Patriots bring in Matt Cassel for a look?
I say the news breaks tomorrow around 10AM.
Well, I was wrong about Matt Cassel being kept, so I can be wrong about this, but I don't see it.
The players a team brings in for a look-see then dumps are typically young guys or over-the-hill vets without a lot of options, who come in on a minimum contract with no guaranteed $$.
The QB market is so bad that Cassel should be able to land a gig which will spot him a signing bonus and a couple million. That would not be the Belichek way.
-
To think they gave Meh the most snaps in practice as number one the last few weeks before naming TT starter, and barely gave EJ any. What a waste of reps in hindsight.
I think that was a very deliberate part of EJ's development and installing the offense. I thought the former at the time, though I'm not sure I posted it. The latter is in hindsight - I really thought they would keep Cassel.
I think Roman was using the vet QB to "teach" the offense against the 3's on D, and using the 1's on D and the backup OL to put more pressure on EJ and teach him to read and react quicker.
Honest Rex did keep telling us not to "read too much into" who got what snaps, now, didn't he?
-
Probably not.
jw
Zing!
-
The #Bills made final moves to get to 53 - DT Red Bryant, QB Matt Cassel, C Dalton Freeman, S Jonathan Meeks, LB Kevin Reddick.
Whoa, did NOT see that coming. I hope it's not a case of "business as usual, the Bean Counters won".
I have no strong opinions on Red Bryant or Kevin Reddick, but if we're keeping Urbik I hope to high heaven he learns how to snap, or that Wood lives a charmed football life.
-
He is a pretty good reporter (his Talley story was excellent).
Credit where credit is due: He's (Graham) an excellent feature writer, and I enjoyed his Maybin and Jackson articles as well.
Not to make too fine a point about this, but....
Sources are protected by journalistic ethics. Even if there were no laws to that effect, a journalist is expected to keep his/her sources private, if they so request. It just so happens the law currently backs up these ethics.
But a source's information doesn't' simply get passed from the journalist to the public without some vetting and analysis. The journalist shouldn't allow him/herself to be used as the puppet of a source. I think that much is obvious.
Well put Dean. Both are points of journalistic ethics. But the presumption that a journalist is a special class of person who will perform the latter is part of the basis for the legal protection afforded to them and their source.
Yeah, but I don't instantly block people when they try to fight back. I'm an !@#$, but I'm not an ivory-tower !@#$ like he is.
DC Tom will continue to publically call everyone he disagrees with an idiot, but two sources inform me that the ivory tower in which he's not a !@#$ was constructed entirely of illegally imported ivory from poached endangered elephants
Hopeful, still waiting....
I'm a writer myself for a living and a journalism major in college so I know all about the legalities. But this isn't really one of them. No one is going to jail and Graham isn't protecting himself or his sources from prosecution. Sure you can, and you rightfully pointed out, the libel angle but that is not a practical matter here. Graham didn't even use those words, he reported them. The Bills guys said that.
Hey, Kelly. I'm not a lawyer and I'm getting too f**ing close to playing one on the net, but it's my understanding that if an ordinary shmo such as myself damages someone's reputation by printed statements that I phrase as "I was told by two different people (eg sources)", I can't hide behind that statement as protection from legal prosecution. I could be forced to reveal my sources or prosecuted myself if I refuse. But a journalist is afforded legal protection from either, which is why it is not a practical matter. And hopefully now I will walk away from this, cuz I've really said all I have to say.
-
Male hookers?
gone rogue with 'em
It's not really a legal matter even though you are correct that there are legalities. But that is not why he is not telling his sources. It's because of the trouble they would get in and because they would no longer feed him information. That is what all reporters do. He doesn't at all need to reveal his sources. He would be dumb to. But it's not because of the legalities.
You're completely right that Graham has personal motivation not to reveal sources because that's how the well dries up. But your thinking is backwards on the legal matter - this is a "fish don't feel the water" issue to folks in the US where Freedom of the Press and Shield Laws are SOP. It isn't a legal matter BECAUSE Graham is a reporter and is afforded immunity from libel for publishing sourced information and "shielded" from revealing his sources - the Bills or Whaley could sue for libel (published statements that damage reputation) and they'd get exactly nowhere and they know it, so just don't and say you didn't.
-
Here is where I go "ad hominem" on you. Your opinion on the subject means less to me because you don't know what Tim Grahams' job is. You think he is just a reporter. That is incorrect. The very premise of your disagreement is undermined by this fact.
HA! As an "ad hominem" argument, that is an epic fail - my understanding of Tim Graham's job is entirely relevant to the discussion!
Here, let me help you out. If you wanna go ad hominem on me, you gotta learn stuff about me and then attack me for something personal and entirely irrelevant to the topic at hand. Let me see....I just acknowledged my ignorance of what Volleyball girls say to each other when they circle up after each point. You could attack me for that - "Hopeful, you ignorant sh**, how dare you criticize sports journalist Tim Graham when you don't even know what female Volleyball players say to each other on the court after each point and you demeaningly referred to them as Volleyball girls". That would be an ad hominem fallacy, because I can be butt ignorant on the point cited, and still have valid points about Graham.
That's what Graham did to Coller - Coller can be lying like a rug about his college sports history and still have valid points or questions about Tim's "rogue" tweet. His college sports history isn't relevant to the question of whether Tim's tweet was appropriate journalism, thus it constitutes an ad hominem attack, a logical fallacy.
Graham's Wiki describe him as a journalist and "enterprise reporter". His byline at the News describes him as "News Sports Reporter". These roles and his tweet about not "outing" his sources appear to infer he relies upon the legal protection afforded to members of the press against revealing sources and legal consequences for publishing sourced information. That's enough for me. if he's claiming sources he must protect as the origin of his claims, he is functioning as a reporter and should be subject to journalistic standards.
The press has great power, in part because of the legal protections they are afforded. With great power comes great responsibility.
-
The problem is that the argument is subjective to begin with.
Unfortunately by chiming in Collen opened himself up to being intentionally misleading about his basketball exploits and Graham was aware of it so he took the opportunity to turn the tables on him.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "the argument is subjective to begin with".
Collen only opened himself up to the logical fallacy of an ad hominem attack by questioning a reporter who considers such as a responsible substitute to responding to questions.
-
We have an "extra" roster spot because of Dareus suspension. The Bills could choose to hold on to MC through the cut down day as that extra player. Then on the 12th they cut him and promote someone from the practice squad, resign a player who cleared waivers or sign someone else's castoff.
What would that accomplish? It would keep Meh off the market while teams are finalizing their rosters. He doesn't get picked up if he's cut that late. If he was picked up after the first game I think his salary isn't guaranteed? Is that harsh? Yup. Cutting Jackson was harsh to, but, it's business. You make all of this clear to Cassel when you're talking about a new contract. Let him decide.
Any chance this plays out?
This is something I haven't heard of before - can anyone point to a source or explain further?
Is it really financially prudent to have the highest paid backup qb in the league at #3, or is it recklessly worried about the worst case scenario?
I know you are bending over pretty far backwards to justify that it's not far out of line, but it is. Is there a scenario where you end up right? Sure. But I think it's very narrowly defined and very rare and that's why you don't see it despite your efforts to compare it to top end primary backups that are 1 play away.
So if I'm understanding your point, what really sticks with you is that he might be "#3" and that moves the compensation from "on the high side for a good vet backup" to fiscally "reckless", have I got it?
It isn't well-described as "bending over backwards" to factually report the salary other vet backups receive - but if I understand your rebuttal, the sticking point is that he'd be #3, and you feel it's a poor comparison between #3 and between #2, the guy who is "one play away".
My unstated premise is that the Bills have rather a unique QB situation where both #1 and the putative #2 are relatively untested "dark horses" for a team with the stated goal of "Win Now", such that Cassel is more in the functional role of being "primary backup, one play away".
We can certainly agree to disagree on that point. As for financially prudent vs reckless, what is the Bills spending on the QB position overall with and without Cassel?
-
Again, looking at Cassel's past 4 seasons, he's neither played well nor stayed healthy. If we're thinking that TT and EJ could possibly suck and get injured, why pay a guy $4.15M when for the past 4 seasons he's sucked and gotten injured?
Also as someone said, if TT and EJ suck or get injured, I'd rather finish with a bad record and have a shot at a top QB prospect than have a middling record with Cassel.
I don't agree that Cassel's past 4 seasons he's neither "played well nor stayed healthy". He was injured last season, true - it happens, and his injury wasn't something that is worrisome as a baseline (eg Hx of concussions). Prior to that he played pretty well backing up Ponder in the AP-centric, run heavy offense that he historically has run well in 2013, and played well at the start of 2014 until he lost AP just before playing New England (then he sucked, then he got injured). So I think the question "Why pay a guy $4.15M when he's sucked for the past 4 seasons and gotten injured?" is based upon a faulty premise.
If you take the position that if TT and EJ suck, you'd rather tank the season and draft higher, then your argument makes sense and we should cut Cassel ASAP. The stated Bills position is that we intend to make the playoffs this year - not we intend to either win with TT or EJ, or suck and draft high. So the question the Bills would evaluate from, given their stated position, is are they a stronger team better positioned to meet their goals with Cassel, or without him?
-
Normal guy doing his job.
When you put something online that people don't like you find out in a hurry that there are more irrational internet a*holes than could possibly exist offline.
Then you give them a little sarcasm back.........and all of a sudden YOU started it and YOU ARE thin skinned for being snarky.
bull ****. The man is a reporter. His job is who what when where why, not to use libelous terms that get picked up by the national media then follow up only with sarcasm and ad hominem attacks rather than do his job - explain what that meant, question the people involved, and report on their responses.
God's Truth that the internet is chock full of a*holes and trolls does not excuse the man from the responsibilities of his job if he wants to be seen as a credible reporter and source.
-
As for being a good reporter, being factual shouldn't be an on again/off again thing. His "rogue Whaley" story was slipshod work, made worse because national media picked up on it. Frankly I hold his editors at the News responsible. They are supposed to be the gatekeepers and make reporters defend their work, especially when making damaging accusations of an NFL GM.
I butt heads with PtR all the time, but this is spot on IMHO. If you want to tweet that someone "went rogue", especially if you want to frame it in a way that makes it impossible to refute ("the bills will maintain unity while speaking publically but...."), you better be willing to back it up and explain just what you mean by that, especially after you acknowledge that the guy did inform his boss. To do otherwise is slipshod indeed.
-
Fall ball is like tryouts..........but I think it should all count so I can start bragging on my college basketball exploits.
As far as "irresponsible" journalism......."rogue" is a term that has a literal meaning....it also has a jagoff meaning for the people who learn the language from video games.....so it will be perceived differently by different intellects.
Should Tim Graham take into account that it will throw folks like eball off the deep end? Absolutely not. It's the responsibility of the populous to learn the language not for reporters to simplify it for them.
Basketball: I guess it depends upon exactly how you refer to your college basketball exploits? I don't know the details of what Coller claims re baseball. If you claim you played basketball in college, but you weren't a good player and didn't make the roster, you're being factuallly accurate, brag away. 99.5% of the population can't ball out even at that level so cred to you. If you put it on your resume that you were a 4 year starter at a DI school and you played fall ball, you're lying. If you play fall ball and you brag about your exploits, you're a tool.
If someone calls you out on something you've done, and you respond by attacking some aspect of their character, that is called an "ad hominem argument" and is regarded as a type of logical fallacy and a refuge of people who really don't have an adequate response. That appears to be what Tim Graham has done in responding to Coller's questioning his tweet by attacking Coller's resume.
I don't know about jagoff meanings from video games. Merriam Webster Online defines rogue as a man who is dishonest or immoral; a dishonest or worthless person; but also a mischevious person. Urban dictionary says "going rogue" is either Someone who "acts independently and wayward from the usual group, generally acting in an outrageous or abnormal manner" but also a "euphamism for unprotected anal sex".
I think if you're a reporter whose tweets get picked up and echoed by national media, you better be damn careful before you use a term that calls a man dishonest or immoral or worthless in a respected source for definitions of the language, and you better be ready to explain just what you mean lest people think that you're getting too deep, as it were, into his personal life.
-
I don't think you brought money into the equation with your question, you asked what a vet would bring.
To answer your new question money is an issue and it plays a huge factor. Hopefully the Bills have already had talks with Cassel's people. "Listen, we'd like to keep Matt on, but, simply cannot at his current salary. Would a restructuring (paycut in this case, not simply moving $$$ from one year to another) be something you would consider? If not, we are in serious talks about cutting you (at the last possible instance).
How would Meh respond to that? Don't know. He might be pissed, or he may thank his lucky stars that someone is willing to pay him $2M (pick your #) to hold a clipboard and be inactive on game days.
Good points, Sphere O' Beer. Here's my problem though. If we really want a vet as a "derisking strategy" for unproven QB, is it worth the potential cap savings we might actually get to risk having Cassel walk? And if we aren't set on the need to keep a vet as a derisking strategy, why not just cut the guy and save it all?
Cassel is getting $4.24M if he's here (Sunday, or Thursday - anyone sure when the season officially starts?). Schaub is getting $2M from the Ravens to hold a clipboard this year. Hasselbeck 's salary is $2M. Fitzpatrick is getting $3.25M from the Jets. McCown (whom I would argue was signed to compete with a 1st round draft pick, he just won) is getting $2.25M salary ($5.25M overall this year) from the Browns.
If I'm Cassel's agent, I'm quite confident that $2-3M is a reasonable "going rate" for a capable vet playing backup in a QB-starved league that just snapped up Vick and for God's sake, Tim Tebow. So if we go that route we save maybe $2M at most? And when the "injury bug" strikes, Cassel can possibly pull in all of what he's making now plus more from some desperate team.
I think the Bills tried that tactic with Fitz's people when he was owed $3M roster bonus and $4.45M salary/workout in 2013. They signed TJax with a $0.5M bonus and $1.75M if he's on the roster for the season (escalating if he started) and I think they offered Fitz similar salary his first year, with nothing guaranteed and performance escalators. And Fitz said "even as a backup I can pull in a signing bonus and more money than that" and got reportedly $3.3M from the Titans his 1st year (incl. signing bonus etc). The result was we signed "German word for Made of Glass" Kolb for a total of $2.9M and wound up with a project rookie and a bunch of scraps starting for us, then splurged on the Orton follies to the tune of $5.5M. Meanwhile Fitz, down in Texas, turned in the best stats of his career.
I'm not saying we should have kept Fitz, I'm just saying we were penny wise, pound foolish in our past veteran QB follies. If we cut Cassel, we risk scrambling hard for a decent QB if Tyrod and EJ flame out or get hurt - and there's a higher risk of both than usual given the lack of NFL playing history and tendency to run.
IMHO, you either decide you need a vet on the roster and pay the man. Or you decide you don't need a vet on the roster, and you send the Turk.
Me, I want to see the Bills go All In on the season and keep the vet QB until we know for sure what we got. We're under the cap right now, and if Dalton Freeman works out at center and we draft one next year, we can save $4.1M by handing Eric Wood a pink slip after the season esp. if he doesn't really step it up.
Can Cassel's contract be re-negotiated? If Cassel is cut, no one would claim him on waivers and take over his existing contract (starter money), as no other starting positions are up for grabs. So, Cassel will be a backup somewhere. And if he'll only be offered backup money elsewhere, there's gotta be a way to keep him here at a lower salary, yes?
Waivers do not apply to Cassel. He is a vested vet.
Veteran backups around the league (one can nitpick points) are getting between $1M and $3.25M, and Cassel is arguably towards the top of the heap on the talent/age scale for that group of guys (Vick? Schaub? Hasselbeck?).
I think he'd find a home PDQ, and if he didn't find a home immediately for lower $$, he'd find pay dirt as soon as injuries hit.
So we're talking "playing chicken" over maybe $2.25M, which sounds like huge money to me but is kind of chicken feed where the most important position in football is concerned.
-
I know some people don't think much of EJ but he did actually win games for the Bills. There is no need to exaggerate his record. It's not 0-fer.
I don't see anyone exaggerating his record (or even bringing it up here, save you). A good QB on a crap team can have a mediocre or bad record. The record belongs to the team.
Regardless of record, the fact is the job EJ did as QB when last he played was not good enough to put us where we want to go. He didn't seem able to read defense and react quickly enough to be accurate, or to go through his progressions. He did look much improved this preseason, but a lot of players look great in preseason who don't when it's for-real. One notable difference between PS and regular season is the complexity and variety of the D he'll have to read, so given his past performance reading D and reacting quickly enough, there seems reasonable grounds for concern.
Don't you see having a starter who has never played a snap in the NFL and a much-improved young guy who hasn't shown that improvement in the regular season as cause for concern? Not for being a downer - I'm genuinely excited for this season to start - but if we really are in "win now" mode, there is a known phenomenon that good play in PS doesn't always translate to regular season. It's a risk. The de-risking strategy is obvious - keep Cassel around - and has the possible benefit of providing the young QB with a veteran peer to help them develop. If teams that have had some success with young QB do this (Colts, Dolphins) maybe it might outweigh the $$ and the roster spot.
I think that's the point people are trying to make. On the other hand, I think Roman is crazy like a fox and he had EJ playing against our 1's D as much as he did for a reason - to help him progress and chart his progress against realistic regular season type D. So I go with what the coaches and football people decide - as long as the bean counters and marketing guys aren't ruling the roost as they used to.
Cassel released
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
O'Leary did surprise me. On the other hand, teams who like something they see in a guy sometimes do give their draft picks a season to develop, and they might feel he'd be signed by other teams.
Or, they are keeping him as a "body" while the receiving corp heals. I'm sure it hasn't escaped others that while in theory, we kept 7 WR, in practice 2 of them are ST guys leaving 5, and of those 5, 3 are returning from injury leaving 2 uninjured (counting Sammy as uninjured)
Remember when considering backups, ST is also important. How is O'Leary doing on ST? How was Bryant vs his competition?