BigBuff423

I'm not sure if the dart, "Since you use big word" was intended to be jab at me or not, so I'll leave that alone since I've kept the dialogue open without personal attack. However, it's not a matter of thinking just any ole player can be as good as Byrd or the "plug and play" opinion. I do think the BILLS would need to do their homework, as in any Draft and the result of any good Draft, but I very much think Byrd is over-stating his value. I would rather Draft a Safety to play in Byrd's position and SPEND the FA money on *POSITIONS* of real impact such as Offensive Line. Let me ask you this: if the BILLS spent that same money on a viable RT and / or LG, and then took a Safety in the 3rd round, how do you think this team would fare? Do you believe that Byrd's impact would be greater than the ability to have a proven Tackle and / or Guard to protect EJ and provide good run-blocking, especially on goal line and 3rd down situations, with a Rookie Safety in the backfield? I think the effect of having a good to great Tackle and / or Guard who could do those things, and potentially truly effect the Offense, while a Rookie Safety would only have a minimal marked difference in a game -- with all other factors being equal of course. You may disagree, and that's cool...I'm man enough to be amiable to the differences of opinion without trying to bully someone else into my way of thinking or ridicule someone just because they hold a zealous opinion divurgent from my own. But, let's keep these facts in mind when it comes to how the BILLS do business in the future. Also, you besmirch the BILLS in years gone by because they would let good talent and players go, yet you fail to acknowledge that the BILLS front office has done the opposite in many recent cases, ala KW, SJ, FJax, and landing Super Mario. Just food for thought...no need to be all angry or frustrated in a lame attempt to say things like, "Since you use big word", as though that's something to be ashamed of or go hiding from...I said I was going to leave that alone...well, apparently not.

Haha!! I just think the schedulers will be looking for something different. And with Marrone in his second year, Schwartz now the DC, not to mention Oakland's most likely Rookie QB, it could be an interesting story as a whole. However, I'm also sure the San Diego Chargers will garner more national interest. But, I still think the BILLS have a chance to open at Oakland on Monday Night in the late game. Truthfully, in part because it gives both teams a Prime Time National game and its in the first week....before both teams are out of it, lol

Great news...glad to see his strengths fit right in where the BILLS WRs and to some degree, the Offense in general, need to improve.

I disagree...and my argument is valid for this reason: paying him now, whatever his demands may be, makes it difficult to pay the players at POSITIONS of value in the coming years. And for those who say, "he'll restructure his contract", how do you know that? And if he doesn't and the BILLS release him, they get no value for him AND take the Cap hit anyways! If they want to trade him at that point, you have to find a team willing to take on the contract the BILLS agreed to or have Byrd willing to renegotiate it at that point. Again, a place the BILLS don't need to be in when another Safety Drafted will do just fine. He's not a LT or Center, he's not a QB or a Shut-down Corner, he's not a DT or pass-rushing DE...he's a Safety. His position does NOT command that kind of money. And paying now while planning later is exactly how teams lose their good players or how they lose players while getting nothing in return. It's a poor man's philosophy.

If you read my previous posts then you would see that I'm all for paying a Franchise caliber QB whatever the market value is, so bringing QB into the argument is your own, not mine. As for apples and oranges, really? Did you even bother to look at the link I provided or look over the information. Because part of your statements is, "As far as similar production, the mid tier safeties are not All Pro caliber and don't provide the same impact that Byrd has for this defense", and yet that's exactly what Earl Thomas is, not to mention the advent of Clark and the up and coming McCourty (much to the BILLS' chagrin). What Byrd means to "this Defense" is what's wrong with the argument, because you ASSUME in that vacuum that no Safety can replace him, when that's not nearly accurate as it's an assumption. What I do know is that good and successful teams on a consistent basis do an evaluative analysis as to where the money is spent, by *POSITION*, AND NOT PLAYER. The point here is not whether Byrd is any good, or if the BILLS should want to keep him, it is in my opinion about whether the money allocated to the position of Safety is a wise allocation of the limited amount of money a team can spend. In earlier post someone mentioned Glenn, Gilmore, and A. Williams. And to that same argument, the money is better spent on Glenn and Gilmore, based upon their POSITION. Now, if A. Williams is reasonable in his request and the money spent is more of the middle-tier money, then keeping A. Williams would be fantastic, assuming he continues to play well. However, if A. Williams is Byrd-esque in his demands, then let him go or trade him, but it would be unwise to allocate once again money in a position that does not value itself that way. Look at how successful teams have done it over the last several years, or the Pats since Belichick has been there, and you will see a pattern develop. I like Byrd, and all things being equal I hope the BILLS can sign him to a reasonable contract. But if he wants to be the top paid Safety in the game, it would be IMO a foolish and frivolous decision to give in to his contractual demands.

I kept adding in more info to my last post. Please see it and review. And see where the good teams invest their limited money, via cap space. If this were baseball and the BILLS were the Yankees or Red Sox, I would say to pay Byrd, whatever the market value is for a player of his caliber. But in the NFL, this is all about choosing the location of your dollars. FWIW, I prefer this model of team management, but again, if there was no cap and the BILLS had the endless revenue, I would have no problem with the BILLS paying their own guy whatever he wanted. And yet the Giants Offensive line couldn't stop a hamster with a backpack full of marshmallows while their Defensive Line was much, er maligned, and couldn't get pressure. And how do you think the Steelers are feeling right now with Polomalu's contract when he hasn't produced and truly contributed while Clark is in the middle of the pack regarding salary and yet been quite good? The Steelers are a perfect of example of keeping a player around for sentimentality while his projected productivity is less than the current level of play. It's why players leave the Patsies and seem to relatively disappear after being at the center of the football universe while there...and don't say Welker, he walked into a situation where there is an Offense that even TJ Graham could get open and come close to a 1,000 yards and 8 TDs... As for having a replacement ready...that's what the Draft is for! You get the guy you think you can replace in talent. Every team...I repeat, EVERY team, goes through cycles of talent and moving guys forward, up and out...that's the NFL.

That's being presumptive about the money the BILLS "might" have if they were to do that. My point is that over paying for a *POSITION* and not just a player is what puts teams in a strapped cash category. Someone said I was grasping at straws, but the very point of not over-committing to one player, that is not a value *POSITION* is exactly my point...you can NOT know what will happen in six months, let alone next year. And yet, committing all that cash to a player who is NOT worth it, fails to meet the financial reasonability test. There are and will be great players that can truly help this team in the next year or two to come into FA, not to mention their own, and paying a player such as Byrd just is not the smart money. Don't believe me? Look at the teams who are consistently successful...how do they do it? They pay the *POSITIONS* of true value and let other guys walk or trade them for value to replace them because a Safety is a dime-a-dozen in the NFL. Will you be able to get an immediate impact player at Safety to replace Byrd? Probably not, but you will get similar production for signficantly less money...however, the trade-off for a Pro-Bowl, All-Pro, LT or Center pales in comparison to that value...spend the money on the O Line and D Line, the QB, and Corners, maybe a LB...not WRs, not RBs, not TEs, and not Safeties...these are all skill-set guys that depend on the aforementioned players in their positions of value. Getting caught-up in paying a single player, who does not play at a *POSITION* of value is where teams like the Redksins, et. al, get into cap trouble and are frequently scrambling to find ways to stay below the cap and then paint themselves into a corner. If you want to disagree about paying Byrd, fine...then feel free to vocalize your support in paying him...but realize you're paying a *PLAYER* at a *POSITION* that does NOT hold that value in the NFL... Furthermore, take into consideration the following information: Top 10 paid Safeties in 2013: **Denotes Playoff Team 1. Polamolu 2. **Berry 3. **Goldson 4. **Weddle 5. Rolle - Giants 6. Jones - Dolphins 7. **Chancellor 8. Griffin - Titans 9. Byrd 10. Branch - Raiders 4 Safeties that are in the top 10 paid and in playoffs. Lowest Paid Safeties in 2013: **Denotes Playoff Team 1. Miles - Ravens 2. Cyprien - Jags 3. Doughty - Redskins 4. **Spillman - 49ers 5. Landry - Jets 6. **Bruton - Broncos 7. **Wilson - Patsies 8. Elam - Ravens 9. **Dahl - 49ers 10. Smith - Vikings Now also consider, Earl Thomas is 21st, Ryan Clark is 23rd, McCourty is 35th, and Adams (Broncos) is 38th. Tell me where the money is best spent...there are 4 Safeties, 2 on the 49ers who had one of the best Defenses in the game, that are in the bottom 10 paid Safeties while there are a littany of good to great Safeties in the middle tier, some still working on Rookie Salary wage, which only bolsters my argument that you can Draft a Safety and get nearly the same production at a much cheaper rate. Of the Offensive Line salaries: the Seahawks spend the 2nd most on the Offensive Line and the Broncos spend the 4th most on the Offensive line. OH, and the BILLS spend the 4th L-E-A-S-T!!! Here's a link to a site that allows an interactive demonstration of exactly where the money is spent. you can hover over the position and see the players and their salaries for this year. Quite interesting. Broncos spent money on Corners and LBs, while saving money on DT and Safeties. Seahawks spent most of their Defensive money on DE and DT. They are relying on Rookie salary contracts for their incredible Corners. But good info to have... http://www.theguardian.com/sport/interactive/2013/nfl-salaries-positions-2013-2014#denver-broncos,denver-broncos

And a few years, did anyone see Peyton leaving Indy?? So, what if by some freak of events Aaron Rodgers became available for ANY reason and the BILLS would LOVE to pursue Rodgers but due to over paying for good, but not players who will make a long-term difference, and all their cap money is leveraged for the future, they are unable to make a solid and blockbuster offer to get Rodgers here?? I know it will most likely never happen, but again who thought Peyton was leaving Indy, under any circumstances??? So, if those dollars are tied up and a player of Rodgers' caliber comes available that would absolutely make a difference on this team, what say you then?? So many assumptions are made about what is available and what can be done, but poorly planning for contingencies and spending to the ceiling every year is a mismanagement of funds...let....Byrd....go. And get trade value in return, maybe for a real impact player.

Good for Brees. Graham..take your millions, play with heart, and be grateful. End of story.

It's not *my* portrayal, it is how the NFL business is today. Every dollar committed to one player is unattainable to another. And when it comes to Safeties, they just don't deserve that type of money. And at some point there is going to be a position, i.e. LT and QB, that will command that type of money and when you continuously play Russian Roulette with the cap ceiling, you're bound to get bit. The Patriots continue to field exceptional teams without having the cap restrictions and letting players just like Byrd take a walk or trading him while the value is there. That's what I'm an advocate for, trading him. Not letting him walk and not signing him to a top tier FA type of money. Let him go somewhere else if that's the kind of money he believes he deserves. I would rather pay OL and DL for the same dollars than a Safety. As for their reluctance to pay for "elite talent" all that hogwash went out the windwo when they made Super Mario the richest Defensive player in the NFL. The BILLS demonstrated their willingness to pay, and over pay, for elite talent when warranted. Byrd is not worth it. Again, just because they have the cap space THIS year does not mean they need to spend all the way up to the cap just for the hell of it...there are contracts in waiting and players that will need to be assigned that have *POSITIONS* of value and Byrd is not one of them. I would tag and trade him. But, alas that will just mean the BILLS let him walk or they give him the largest contract ever given to a Safety...ridiculous

If the BILLS don't sign any FA that is of equal value, the BILLS would get one in 2015.

I'm thinking the BILLS open at Oakland, the late game, on Monday Night Football.

Agreed.

But to what extent did he have say in the Football Operations? Much? Little? All? I'm not sure anyone outside of OBD knows that...what we do know, is what has transpired since Brandon came out last January and said, "We are going to be a progressive, forward thinking" organization / team. Have they done that? Do you think they've made strides towards that? With that evaluation, I think you can decide what's what at OBD this year...

If ONLY it were that simple. Paying Byrd top dollar means substracting that dollar from somewhere else. The reason why there is so much parity in the NFL is due to the salary cap and there's no Yankees or Red Sox in the NFL that can just "buy" a bunch of guys they want. It means making every dollar stretch and putting the dollars in *POSITIONS* of value and not necessarily players. It's why QBs, LT, DE, and Corners can demand such money, tthey are positions of value. While some Safeties are exceptional, they just shouldn't be paid from dollars designed to go elsewhere on the team. The BILLS took Leonhard off the trash pile of wasted FA talent and put to good use his abilities. Was he / is he as good as Byrd?? Hell NO! But...there are other talented and young Safeties that can fill in and make a good set of plays for the BILLS. And when you consider this team needs some serious upgrades at the Offensive line, a Beast of a LBer to help with the run, and probably could use a Vet corner and / or WR, that money begins to dry up quickly, especially when you consider Dareus is going to need a contract soon, and it could be argued he plays a bigger role in the Defense's ability to improve than Byrd's. If it were as simple as throwing dollars at guys you wanted on a team, the Redskins and Cowboys would be atop the NFL every year...but Drafting good players, making key acquisitions in FA, and spending the dollars to the positions of signficance is how you get a winner and then maintain winning....look at the teams who have done that this year and in the last 10 years...

One thing: last I checked, Hairston still plays for the BILLS and without injury would have been their starting RT. That's not to say that hindsight proves this trade to be largely slanted in the Seahawks' favor, but just wanted to point that out. Also to consider, many on this board, while not happy about it, understood it at the time because Lynch was one more run in with the law away from a pretty good suspension, 8 games I think was his next step if I'm not mistaken - but certainly could be. Lynch just didn't do well in Buffalo - on a personal level. It could have been separation from his family, and yes I know he is now in Seattle, but West Coast is still much closer than Buffalo. It could also be he bonded with Coach Carroll as Carroll was used to coaching guys at USC from the Southern California area and it greatly improved his maturity and ability to handle all of the non-football related issues off the field. However, he did just get fined by the NFL for not speaking to the media, with that fine held in abeyance based on continued cooperation with NFL media guidelines, and that speaks to some continued resistance to handle the NFL obligations off the field. Either way, he's done real well in Seattle and wish him the best. I remember his first TD with the BILLS and loved what I saw, but sometimes what gets lost in all of this, is that these are young kids coming out of college and getting their first real job. It takes a little time, patience, and strong guidance to help them avoid these types of mistakes. In retrospect it would have been nice to get more for Lynch, but I understood the feeling in trading him at the time as well.

That type of committment in terms of money, only bears true if the BILLS tag him and retain him. If they trade him, some, most, or all of that money gets passed on to the receiving team in the trade...I don't think the BILLS should let him walk, they Drafted him and gave him the opportunity to play in the NFL. He has played well and done a good to very good job at his position, but now it's time to move on. A successful team in the long-run does not commit that kind of money to a position that does not have such an impact. QBs and the line demand such money, as we've seen with other good teams, all other moving parts can be easily replaced. So, tag him and trade him.

The sad part about this....that would be an improvement if in fact it was the case...I don't WANT to be "The Lions" but considering their relevance of the last few years, prime time games, Franchise QB, and at least one playoff appearance since Bill Clinton reinvigorated the use of cigars...it would be an uptick in demonstrative performance.

My thoughts on Byrd: I understand that the BILLS don't get better by letting good players walk to other teams. But, this team is also not just one or two positions away from being a perennial contender, they need at least five or six signficant upgrades in talent. This overhaul has taken years and by paying Byrd too much - say $8 or $9 mill in guaranteed money the next couple years - they would commit a huge investment into two players, which I'm not a fan of Super Mario's contract either - when others need to be addressed. They would essentially, IMO, place themselves in a golden wheelchair...really nice looking, but still crippled by over-extending money into just two positions, neither of them the QB and one of them at least potentially mitigated by either a Rookie Draft or another player already on team, i.e. Searcy. I have no qualms with Byrd as a player, business man I'm not so happy with, and if he can get that money somewhere else, God Bless him...but IMO, if he doesn't play for the $6.5 mill average, I would rather see the BILLS tag him and trade him...and use that money on the Offensive line and maybe a Corner where a Defense really relies on someone to stick to the WR like wallpaper......

And yet...your name is "Why So Serious?"....hmmmm, this is a mystery...

The problem I have with that is one: paying Byrd too much, when Safeties don't command that kind of money. The Pats and other teams have done well to let certain, good to great, players walk when they wanted something else. At this point, I'm an advocate of tagging Byrd and trading him for a Draft pick. second: for the FA money, I would rather spend it on the Offensive line, an actual Corner, and potentially a WR or a proven run-stopping LB. But, regretably the BILLS don't consult me...although they should!

The problem with this statement / argument as I see it, is that many say, "We're just one Franchise QB away" from being a Super Bowl contender or a very good playoff team, when such statements related to Tom Brady or Peyton Manning is that they are *such* rare finds that at this point they are first ballot HOFers. And pinning all our hopes on the BILLS locating, cultivating, and providing the necessary culture to get a HOF QB is myopic in perspective and in my mind, signficantly poor planning. Do I HOPE EJ is a HOF QB one day? Well, duh..of course...do I think that if EJ does NOT provide the demonstrated growth as a QB the BILLS should Draft one next year? Yes...but that being said, few teams are able to get a HOF QB right from the start and win a Super Bowl and some teams are able to provide a great team dynamic *DESPITE* the QB or have the QB peak at just the right time, ala Eli and Flacco. So building a multi-talented team approach is more resistant to injuries and consistent success while hedging against intermittent failures. Build a good to great Defense, establish at least one dynamic WR and a solid Offensive line that can run-block with a good, maybe just average QB, and you at least are taking the approach that a team will not need to game-plan for just the QB. Is there any doubt that Peyton Manning will be a HOFer? Nope, not to me...but the one year Indy won the Super Bowl, it took a great defensive effort to get that win and a team that was NOT a great Defense during the regular season, but relied on them in the playoffs. Moreover, you could argue that guys like Marino, Fouts, and Kelly were outstanding QBs but yet failed to win the Super Bowl while guys like Phil Simms (good, but let's be honest about his abilities), Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien et al. all have rings...you can't say a QB is the cure all, not in today's football and certainly not in the football of years ago....it takes a total team effort to do so...and, this team needs five or six upgrades in talent and production before the BILLS can be a legitimate Super Bowl caliber team.

All fair points except the last one regarding the BILLS paying him in the future for their committed money last year...I understand that the BILLS don't get better by letting good players walk to other teams. But, this team is also not just one or two positions away from being a perennial contender, they need at least five or six signficant upgrades in talent. This overhaul has taken years and by paying Byrd too much - say $8 or $9 mill in guaranteed money the next couple years - they would commit a huge investment into two players, which I'm not a fan of Super Mario's contract either - when others need to be addressed. They would essentially, IMO, place themselves in a golden wheelchair...really nice looking, but still crippled by over-extending money into just two positions, neither of them the QB and one of them at least potentially mitigated by either a Rookie Draft or another player already on team, i.e. Searcy. I have no qualms with Byrd as a player, business man I'm not so happy with, and if he can get that money somewhere else, God Bless him...but IMO, if he doesn't play for the $6.5 mill average, I would rather see the BILLS tag him and trade him...and use that money on the Offensive line and maybe a Corner where a Defense really relies on someone to stick to the WR like wallpaper......

Whaley has already said the BILLS will take a similar approach to FA that they did this year...which means no big splash guys. And honestly, I'm good with that. In all due respect to Mario, you don't build a consistent winner through FA, you get complimentary players, good but not superstar material, to add to your Draft class. Look at how the truly successful teams have done it. The ones who have been inconsistent or just bad at it have tried the Yankees approach in the NFL and it's gone poorly for them. That's not to say Hardy isn't a good / great player, but one position just isn't worth that money at this point for the BILLS. Like another poster said, I'd rather they put that money into a couple Offensive line positions, and another DB. As for Byrd, if you can't get him to sign a reasonable deal, then Franchise him and trade him. Like, NOW

Indeed. Furthermore, I hate how self-serving it is to constantly redefine his job for a higher pay. So, if by definition of duties my job closely resembles that of a CEO, I should argue to get paid like one? Come on, it's bullsh*t...add to the fact that if he were a WR instead of a TE, that changes the Saints roster minimums per league rules as well. So, all in all...just shut the f'up and get paid nicely. And remember, what you will make in a one year, many good, hard-working people won't make in a lifetime. Not to mention your edorsements, pension, and fringe benefits. So let's cut with the Poor Me b.s. and just go out and play...you're gonna get paid..like..a LOT! Enjoy it, and kudos to you, but be grateful and play your heart out and love the game. That's all us as fans are asking...