BuffaloBillsForever

Nice cherry picking. Your numbers were still wrong as Spotrac and Buffalo Rumblings have pointed out.

No. The only friction was between Walt and Saul vs. Jesse Pinkman with them scheming with the ricin to make it look like it was Gus that poisoned his girlfriends child. The only person that is alive that could have a beef with Saul is Jesse.

Yeah...but that wasn't you meant in your initial reply.

It's because I care about winning championships and building a team that is a sustainable winner instead of a team that finally gets to the playoffs.

I think it is all the law enforcement angle. The first scene in season one, it was meant to portray Saul's overall paranoia as he thought it could be someone from Uncle Jacks crew (flight jacket, shaved head = skinhead/nazi), but that crew is wiped out in its entirety as is everyone that would want to seek revenge on Saul. The final scene of Saul, Walt and the talk about the Cinnabon it was all about Saul moving on from his life as a lawyer to evade law enforcement.

No. That would be your incorrect responses to my posts that have already been called out by Spotrac, OverTheCap and other websites that deal with the NFL cap regarding the amount of dead money and what it means in regards to the Clay restructure.

The restructure increases the risk exposure to health and decline/performance DRAMATICALLY for an already injury prone player and gives the Bills no opportunity to cut until the final year of the contract. It also increases the cap hits in the future when the Bills are already 2nd in the commitment index for 2017+. The restructure is myopic and entails a lot of potential risk for the future. ...and no, none of the articles was making it sound like the dead money is cumulative.

I hate seeing the Bills mortgage the future even further with the restructure. In 2017+ the Bills are already second in the commitment index. Proper cap management is to just bite the bullet, take your beatings in 2016 with the Clay contract and position the team with future flexibility the next 4 years.

Not really. That is an example of egregious cap management that gives the Bills no future flexibility in regards to Clay. That is the whole point on why the restructure is a bad thing. It is a prime example of sunk cost.

and that is an example of complete disregard to proper cap management

The other risk is it makes it impossible for the Bills to cut him if he starts missing significant time due to injuries in 2016 and 2017 or if there is major decline in play (most likely those will play hand in hand). It is essentially guaranteed because you can't really cut him until the final year because of the dead money involved now.

Spotrac also confirms the dead money totals of 18M, 13.5M, 9M and 4.5M. The high nature of the risk with the restructure comes in play in 2017. Essentially they are giving Clay a fully guaranteed contract because of the dead money commitments.

So Spotrac has updated their numbers after the Clay restructure. Your numbers are wrong. The dead money is: 2016: 18M 2017: 13.5 2018: 9M 2019: 4.5M

I want to see Trump as president make Justin Trudeau squeal.

What are your numbers?

The dead money involved now makes him a player that gives the GM absolutely no flexibilty. They essentially guaranteed his entire contract now because of the ramifications involved in cutting him if there are injuries, decline or both.

This link will describe it all in detail to you. Post restructure it is $9mill per year and 19.5M, 13.5M, 9M and 4.5M respectively in dead money. http://www.buffalorumblings.com/bills-news-notes/2015/3/24/8284785/charles-clay-contract-buffalo-bills-details-cap-hits-future-restructure

With the restructure it makes it very difficult for Whaley to ever cut him. Major consequences against the cap in doing so.

It's moves like the Clay restructure that will allow them to continue on that path. Whaley's myopic plan of win now and not winning has and will continue to have dire consequences on this franchise.

That is a pathetic article by the author explaining the restructure.

It makes TOTAL sense. Dead money goes from 6M,4M and 2M TO 19.5M, 13.5M, 9M and 4.5M. The risk involved with the restructure from 2017 onward has very serious ramifications.

The dead money is insane with restructure. Major risk and gives you no flexibility. It is purely myopic. That's the main reason you say no to this restructure. It makes sense when you consider his inabillty to stay healthy and chronic knee problems that have plagued him throughout his career.

So Clay staying healthy ONCE in his career is sour grapes?

It's not fully explained as it misses the most important thing and that is the rising dead money involved. Clay is a major injury risk and even his own doctors in Miami have questioned his longevity. That is were the potential ramifications of the dead money come in play.

I totally disagree here with this tweet. This opens up all possibilities of disaster with the skyrocketed dead money involved now. Clay is a MAJOR risk on the future of the club with his reliability (has only played one healthy season) and chronic knee problems with the restructure.