Mango

To be clear if you have a PSL at AT&T you have access to dozens and dozens of events.There were 13 concerts at AT&T last year, including 3 Taylor Swift shows (No Mega Huge Events?). Plus Supercross, Monster Trucks, Rodeo's, WWE, big time college football, and soccer games. In concerts alone you get a star every month or so. They are also getting 9 World Cup Games in 2026. Maybe the biggest sporting event on the globe. Also not a Mega Cool Huge Event? Which is the point @MikePJ76 is making. For $20k you get 8-11 NFL football games. And that is it. That is the list of events. Buffalo having the market or not having the market for those events really does not matter in this conversation. In fact I would say it is an argument against PSL's. https://www.concertarchives.org/venues/at-t-stadium--5

The last few years the Bills have had a bunch of weeks where they have the most expensive cheap seats in the league. As in other teams club, box, premium seats are more expensive, but the rockpile, last row of the furthest end of the 300 is more expensive than every other cheapest option in any other stadium.

I have some familiarity with the whole Charlotte situation. But certainly not to your level. I know they left on terrible terms and Johnson was a disaster. However I don't look at those Johnson years as Jordan since he was only a minority owner. Just like the current era isn't a Jordan era, or that I don't have anything pointed at Serena Williams and the business side of the Dolphins. Worth noting that PG was hired a year before Jordan took majority ownership. What I mean about Jordan is that just by existing he has the ability to brand an NBA team in his home state that is absolutely crazy about basketball and it isn't exactly an uphill climb. Selling a majority owned Jordan/Charlotte NBA team that previously dorked the city down twice (by leaving and then by Johnson) was basically like selling water in a drought. I don't discount his the work with the Bills. Ultimately fans don't care about sponsorships. The Sabres are trash. The Hornets are trash. I mean to be more harsh on Terry here than I am on PG. To release a statement that anybody has turned either franchise around in the last 10 years is silly and deserves to be laughed at. Imagine the Hornets hired somebody from the Sabres and Plotkin/Schnall released a statement that they "turned the Sabres around'. Even if we were still a top team attendance wise it would be a super silly statement to make to the fanbase.

You are certainly much more plugged in than everybody. So i will trust your judgement on the whole thing. But I think some of the reflex is that historically terrible Buffalo Sabres owner said that the new guy "turned around""...checks notes...The Charlotte Hornet's. Another bad team. It is admitedly pedantic for me an others to take shots. But also Pegula has to read the room he is speaking to. What bad phrasing. I don't doubt that Pete is well respected in multiple sports league circles. But saying anybody "turned around" a Jordan brand from the business side gives me pause. Especially one whose major revenue stream is the state of North Carolina. He is the states golden child; he has been heavily invested in that community for a very long time, and continues to invest in Charlotte even after the sale. I don't think there is a comparable in the big 4 sports to Michael Jordan buying the Charlotte Bobcats/Hornet's. I don't believe that was a heavy lift. Working for adn being successful Michael Jordan as part of the larger Jordan and NBA brand is a major feather in anybodies cap. But turned around..... Is it just me or does he look kind of like Bob Weir if Bobby had made a number of different decisions and started hitting those TRX bands 60 years earlier.

I don't know. This feels like a boardroom hire that doesn't make much of a difference for any products on the field/ice. This was a very weird quote: He was there 10 years and only 3 winning years. My teenage niece could market Michael Jordan to basketball fans in his home state of North Carolina. He is one of if not the only player in the American big 4 sports to ever be bigger than the league itself.

I was thinking Broncos-esque. They have/had a curl by the shoulder too. I think if you want a "clean" jersey you go straight lines, kind of like the Bills. But if you want it to have curves and stuff you have to make the rest of the color scheme interesting. Kind of like the Sabres jerseys. The blue and gold is great for what we have now. Straight lines, standard circle crest. But the goat head has a ton of color with a lot more shapes.

I like Jason. He would be perfect for Buffalo. But he has a couple of kids with another on the way. His wife is Philly born and raised. Their family is there and he has no need for another pay check. There is no way he takes off to Buffalo for -6-8 months and either leaves his wife home alone pregnant/with a new born or pulls her away from her family so that he can play for a year or two in Buffalo. It would be awesome but I would be shocked if it ever happened.

I am not necessarily advocating for it, but I do think the current in season saving with a roll over make it an interesting conversation. Assuming we move on from Diggs post June 1, don't spend a dime, and come into next season with an extra $24M in space, I think that number just about gets you to both a Douglas and Spencer Brown extension (something Beane has been rumored to be interested in). So with that in mind would you be willing to forgo this season without Diggs if it meant locking down a starting corner and right tackle for the next 3-5? I might. I might not. It would take some balls, but at the very least I would have to pause. Agreed. I don't think the roster is maxed out cap wise but we are running out of major cans to kick down the road as well. Agreed. But with the next draft class, signings, etc. We will have to clear a lot more of the deck to make room. I think the team is committed to getting younger.

So did I. After his restructure he just becomes too expensive to keep all the way through his contract. But going through the numbers it is more advantageous to move on as a post June move this year than it is a new league year next year. New league year for 2025 only saves $5M. It only jacks back up to $18M if we go post June 1 again. https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/stefon-diggs-16872/ I think there might be an error on spotrac since they did their last round of adjustments. They have Diggs as a post June cut saving $500k and trade $19M. It has been consistently $19M for a year. https://web.archive.org/web/20211224005328/https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/stefon-diggs-16872/stats-valuation/

Looking ahead we started this offseason predicting the teams 2025 cap situation would be around $25M under. As of this AM on Spotrac our 2025 cap number is already $10M OVER. Moving on from Von next year helps. They can restructure Allen again. Plus some roll over will make up for that. But I cannot help but think the regime is tempted to move on from Diggs as a post June 1 cut/trade to free up $19M with the possibility of rolling all or most of it over into 2025. Then they get another $5M in relief the following year. If they feel they can get some rookie production in camp from their first pick, Kalil can flash on the outside to fill Davis' role, and Samuel in the slot it may give them the cajones to roll into the offseason with that group.

The Bills save $19M cutting or trading Diggs post June 1 per both Spotrac and OTC. I am unsure what the confusion is over the post June 1 trades or stipulations in Diggs contract. In a trade the receiving team picks up his contract. Yes. But there is no “how much they are willing”. The NFL isn’t the NHL, you can’t barter what costs to keep in house and what you don’t.. You either take the contract or you don’t make the trade. Worth noting that because of Diggs restructure the receiving team can cut Diggs more or less whenever they want for next no zero cap implications. His cap number for the receiving team would be right around 16th in the league among WR. That decent value with almost no commitment. The $24M I’m talking about is rolling over the $19M. (Assuming they don’t spend it)

Diggs nets us $19M in totally cap dollars in 2024 if we cut/trade him after June 1. If we don’t spend any of that money in the 2024 season it rolls over to 2025. His immediate effect on the 2025 cap if we cut/trade him on June 1 is +$5M. In theory Diggs could give us $24M more dollars if we don’t touch the $19M this year. Forget the dead cap number. The key is the delta between dead cap and cap hit on the roster. Nailed it!

If Diggs is moved I think it will be post June 1. We get $19M for this season and $5M for 2025. BUT!!! That $19M can be rolled over if we don't sign any expensive vets twisting around out there. A post June 1 trade with minimal 2024 spend would mean we could roll most of that $19M over to 2025 ultimately giving us $25M extra next year. It would go a long way in extending Taron, Rousseau, Brown, and Douglas.

Kind of but no. Diggs cap hit on the roster in 2025 is $27M. A post June 1 trade/cut would save us $5M against the cap. Yes he take up $22M not being in the roster. But he’d cost us $27M off of it. The interesting thing is that if Diggs is a post June 1 move and we sit tight on our roster we would roll that $19M over to 2025. In theory he could add $24M cap dollars next season. I would not be shocked if Diggs is a post June 1 move to reset the cap. Because he was restructured the Bills have eaten so much of his bonuses that any team trading for him would get the 16th highest paid WR with next to zero cap implications if they want to cut him. With Rousseau, Douglas, Taron, and Spencer Brown coming do it is a tempting move.

You are correct. A June 1 move would clear $19M If we are $2M over the cap and we trade Stef this instant we would only be $5M over the cap. This has been belabored all offseason. Yes Stefs dead money is $31M. But keeping him on the roster is $28M. The change in cap isn’t the dead money. The change in cap is the delta between his cap hit on the roster and cap hit off of it. So $3M.

Maybe? Lol.

No it is not. The cap hit is the cap hit. The Browns in that example had a ton of space so they took on Brock Osweiler and his dumb contract for a 2nd round pick. But they didn't barter what cap number to take off of the Houston Texans books. His number was his number. Cleveland then immediately cut him loose. They more or less purchased a 2nd round pick.

Relax, Diggs is a lot of things but he isn't a Philadelphian. Watch yourself buddy!

Sometimes Diggs goes fishing for controversy, drops something fairly innocuous, but also sort of not, then points at everybody and says "why are you guys always like this". There is a strong possibility that in the next 24 hours his IG is a picture of him in the Caribbean with the caption "Ready for water*" and somewhere in the comments he says "why does everybody keep making a bid deal about typos. None of you have ever had a typo?"

Right but you directly compared Davis to Samuel and their roles are not comparable. Signing Samuel does not upgrade Davis. I guess I am not only responding to you, but so much of this thread is talking about Samuel upgrading Davis that I am sort of responding to everybody. Worth noting that Harty was our starting slot receiver for most of the season. Shakir took the job towards the end/in the playoffs. Samuel is certainly an upgrade to Harty. Shakir has been outplaying the guys in front of him for some time now. I am all for adding more talent, and this signing is definitely that, but the constant veteran leapfrogging of some of our draft picks is a little weird. I am pretty high on Shakir and think he may actually be better than Samuel given full time starter duties/reps.

Totally spitballing, but maybe they did do him a solid on this one? It is kind of a restructure, but kind of like Douglas they basically just added a void year. Curious if maybe they wanted AD to be able to announce his own retirement so they restructured then he announced? Or maybe there is some benefit to the order of operations? Like maybe it was advantageous to the cap to restructure then retire rather than have a retirement settlement?

So weird. What went on here? I believe most contracts have restructure language pre-built in so it isn't something they likely needed to discuss with him. There have been some rumored trade speculation around Donald the last few years. Nothing saying he has requested one, but it has definitely been a topic on most sports shows. Curious if he wanted one last go at a ring this year and the restructure guaranteed that he could not be moved so he called it quits. Trouble wrapping my head around this. Something must have happened internally.

Samuel doesn't play on the outside. He is a slot guy through and through. Comparing him to Davis doesn't make any sense. Two very different roles in the offense. You would want to compare him to Shakir in last years offense. All that said everybody knows the plan is to get a WR to play on the outside in Davis spot. But if there are some growing pains Shakir is a pretty versatile guy who absolutely can play in both positions effectively. I think he has some Robert Woods in him as well. I like the Samuel signing, but we also seem to get these mid-tier FA to block our draft picks at times. Samuel and Shakir seem to be an example of that. Shakir is in a good spot to take on more responsibility in the offense and we just signed his replacement in the slot and the entire world knows that we are going to take an outside guy early. We need more WR talent. I get it. But also we blocked playing time for Shakir and Hodgins (who both flashed when given reps) with Curtis Samuel, Deonte Harty, and Isaiah McKenzie (to an extent).

I googled that to double check and the very first thing that came up was this article from Sports Illustrated. It was written/released 1 hour ago. Talk about a guy getting it wrong. Sheesh. https://www.si.com/nfl/rams/news/los-angeles-rams-aaron-donald-contract-restructure-salary-cap#:~:text=However%2C freeing up cap space,indeed be back for 2024.

It’s worth noting that they commit to a lot of interchangeable small speedy inside guys. Even without Tyreek they don’t miss much. They never have anybody with size on the outside with much of any production. This is partially why I thought the Davis criticism was over blown. Not that we don’t need more weapons. But we have seen a number of offenses built around the TE and crisp route running. Diggs/Kincaide is a good enough pairing going forward. We need role players outside of 1 or 2 super stars. Davis is tremendously valuable as a role player. Big strong and speedy on the outside, with enough physicality to be a great run blocker.