Mango
-
Posts
8,778 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mango
-
-
8 minutes ago, Dablitzkrieg said:
He's so young though
Is Edmunds even aloud to drink beer yet?-
3
-
-
16 minutes ago, just1hugheser said:
If we’re going to present “general recovery” let’s present “general production” for 35 year old pass rushers.
Then present “general production” for 35 year old pass rushers with one bad knee.
Then do it again for two of them.
There is no “right on schedule” for this situation. Something like 2/3 of all NFL players are out of the league in 3 years after a single ACL injury. Let alone 2.
Father time is undefeated.
-
52 minutes ago, Conlan58 said:
Lol you almost have to feel bad for any Jags fans coming to our board hoping for some positive insight on Gabe with all of us going "OH NO! Beane asleep at the wheel again!! NO GABE NO!!" and instead everyone is like "probably dropped the pen TBH. good riddance."
He had some good games for the Bills, but disappeared like a blind date when the bill came to the table too often...
I don't think anybody has said "good riddance" this thread seems to be a lot of well wishes.
There is this assumption among Bills fans that you have to have some Chase/Higgins combo on the outside and that everybody else is a dud. Davis was a good piece to have on the outside. The Bills got tremendous value from him. He never cost us more than $2.8M and some seasons as little as $800k. He way outplayed his draft position and his contract. We will not be able to replace Gabe's run blocking and route running for close to the same that we paid him here in Buffalo.
We saw the Patriots and now KC have tons of consistent success having a go to inside WR and a TE and a bunch of role playing pass catchers. I suspect this is the route the Bills are trying to go with Kincaid, DIggs, and Shakir/Cook.
Would I pay Gabe $13M to be a role player in this offense? No. But he is a good player and in a world where there are 3 or 4 $30M cap hits for WR's $13M isn't the wide receiver it used to be. -
1 hour ago, BuffaloRebound said:
My guess is Knox reworked deal is very similar to Hunter Henry’s 3 year $27m deal with $15 guaranteed. He’s trading his bigger deal for more guaranteed money. Bills want him on team next couple of years but at a lower number.
This. I am fairly certain he gets more guaranteed. I would not be shocked if they added a year as well. More guaranteed money, another year on the job, less money per year.
-
1 minute ago, longtimebillsfan said:
I will take your word for that.
https://www.draftsharks.com/fantasy/injury-history/von-miller/4782
11/24/2022 - Knee ACL Tear Grade 3
Today's date - 3/11/2024. -
-
All the talk of a looming Allen restructure. Curious of two other options:
1. I think it is possible an extension makes more sense here. Part of the reason KC is in the situation they are is because they kicked the can down the road to 2031.
2. If possible they may not want to restructure this years number if they don't have to because next years is $56M. A restructure this year would significantly impact that.
Restructure this year or not I think Allen gets an extension in the next 365 days. -
10 minutes ago, longtimebillsfan said:
Not sure I totally agree with your assessment. Von looked really good before his injury.
I expect we will see an improvement in Vons performance in 2024. Maybe not to the level if three years ago, but still a disruptive force.
That was literally 473 days ago from today. LOL.
-
I
9 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:Weren't McGovern and Douglas already done?
I don't see any way that Diggs is restructured. I don't know why that keeps being said...by anybody. At one point Greg had Diggs in his "guaranteed to restructure" column.
Either way I would assume we get a wave of Bills news today.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Allen2Diggs said:
"reworked" sounds more like a pay cut than just a restructure
I'm glad Von and Knox were willing to take less money after a down year.
Curious what the terms of this looks like?
Shooting from the hip I am curious if they basically added a year or two, kept the same total value but increased his guarantees? That would mean that Knox would ultimately have more security and guaranteed money even if it means less year to year?
Unsure though. Just guessing.-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said:
The public money seems to grow larger in this thread every day lol. Its not 1b
Thanks for the correction. Scratch everything I just said because the public money is only $850M not a billion.
-
5
-
1
-
-
I don't love the public money but I could behind it with more public benefit/protections.
There are two things that I am pretty heavy on:
1. Any stadium built with public funds should prohibit the owner from collecting PSL fees. You can either collect PSL or collect public subsidy. You cannot collect both.
2. Any municipality whose money has gone to build the stadium should have open access to viewing the NFL games inside. If you live in NYC, Albany, or Utica you shouldn't have to pay or NFL Sunday ticket or 12 different streaming providers. Granted this was a bit easier to work around in the pre-streaming era. But I still believe it.$1B is an insane amount of public subsidy to turn around and charge PSL's. If owners want to charge it or restrict viewership access then they can pay for their stadiums themselves.
-
4
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, The Wiz said:
here you go. The nice part is they don't know who Gene Wilder is so it's even better.
Millenials definitely know who Gene Wilder is. They’re in their mid 30’s to mid-40’s. They aren’t kids and haven’t been for a long time.For whatever reason whenever somebody ages out of knowing how to use technology every young person in the world going forward is whatever the young generation was at that time.
-
2
-
1
-
-
I feel bad for the fans.
But also KC isn't a place that doesn't have winter. It doesn't get the snow of Buffalo or the cold of Minnesota or Green Bay, but they have winter. The average winter coat and gloves these days are rated for temps that would have been considered pretty high end gear in the 80's and 90's. With weather apps and access to better gear it is bonkers to me that that many people got frostbite. -
47 minutes ago, Tuco said:
It's all spelled out in the CBA. Everything fits into a category one way or another so there's nobody subjectively saying, well he'll probably get 2 sacks so we'll make LTBE. Generally (but certainly not always) if a player didn't get the stat the year before then its considered NLTBE. In this case, since he got zero sacks last year all sack incentives are NLTBE.
Actually, according to the rules spelled out in the CBA, those are all NLTBE incentives. Meaning, none of those incentives will count against the salary cap this year. And any of them that are reached will be charged against next year's cap.
Under both contracts the Bills save cap space by cutting Von at camp. But now he costs the team far less cash out of pocket even if he plays lights out. If Von still looks stiff like last year he can still be cut to save the cap space/roll over. But keeping him on the roster becomes easier to swallow which is beneficial to all parties.
I think part of this is Von betting on himself. But part of it is also to incentivize the team to keep him on the roster. 12 sacks at $27M is bad. 12 sacks at $15M is better. Even if the Bills move on next year (which I think is likely), hitting the market after over performing vs. underperforming makes a world of difference. -
1 minute ago, John from Riverside said:
Von that even 80% of himself is a 10 plus sack guy
And that is really bad value at his previous $25M cap number. You don’t pay premier pass rusher money for 10 sacks.
But it’s good value for $8M.
-
5 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:
It wouldn't be a bonus. It's a not likely to be earned incentive, which are typically based on the player's previous statistical season. I listen to a LOT of Greg Tompsett. That's exactly how he defines it.
You can Google it and that's how it's defined, too.
I'm sure that player and team can come to a different agreement, but what would be the motivation for the player? The entire point is that it benefits both player and team, as this does. That's how you so often hear of players agreeing to something we equate to a "payout." They can earn it back. And if they do, the team owes it the following year.
Tompsett also points out that it can work in favor of the team when a player agrees to LIKELY to be earned incentives, but doesn't reach them. For example, Matt Milano signed an extension last offseason. We don't know the details of the incentives in his contract, but assuming the team put incentives in his contract that were likely to be earned incentives in his contract like tackles, sacks, interceptions, and games played... he likely didn't meet those incentives. Those likely to be earned incentives would have counted against the CAP last year and therefore we'd get that money back in the CAP this year.
If the report is that Von can still earn $20m next year, I doubt it's Beane being ruthless and would bet on the not likely to be earned incentives.
Greg gets some things right. But he gets a lot wrong especially regarding the cap. Cover 1 started as great. They’re less great now. Just my opinion on them.
I think the reason a player is willing to take an incentive laden deal in this situation is because if they don’t his career likely ends. Unless Von has 15+ sacks this year his time here is done at season end. And maybe his career overall is done. You can’t keep a guy who vastly underperforms his cost. And nobody wants to sign a guy who underperforms.
But take a haircut with the possibility to win it back based on performance? If Von gets 8.5 sacks this year at $8M people are having the conversation “He just needed a year to get right” and even if he doesn’t stick around here he is a guy who performed at a level commensurate with his pay. Good credit and bad credit matter.
-
5 minutes ago, NoSaint said:
all that cash being paid this year would both be real dollars out of pegulas pocket and also new money to account for against the cap
he reduced those today to be in line with what would’ve hit if he was cut.
you can chose to believe it was pure goodness in his heart if you want but common sense says he was told “you will receive x dollars, do you prefer to be a bill or a free agent at that number?”
transplant is still working on figuring out void years. Don’t let him teach you about l likely to be earned bonuses
I think the truth is likely somewhere in the middle. Von was way too costly against the cap to cut.
But I do think it was possibly said “hey man, if you underperform on $25M I gotta move on from you next offseason. It is what it is. We think this is your value now. If you reach it you can be a Bill for a while. Otherwise you’re a goner next year. If you renegotiate I’m happy to get you back to $25M in incentives commensurate with that pay/performance”
Also there was some rumor that Von’s original deal was voidable if charged with domestic assault. Google doesn’t tell me that case has gone away yet. This new deal might get Von some more money if something comes of it. But that’s total conjecture.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:
I think he legitimately thinks he can still play and this new deal gives him the opportunity to earn more than what he was scheduled to earn.
You can almost guarantee that 2 of the "hard to reach incentives" put in his contract are tackles and sacks.
That means if he gets more tackles than 2023, he reaches that incentive and earns more.
That wouldn't be hard considering he had 3 tackles
If he gets more sacks than in 2023, he reaches that incentive and earns more.
That wouldn't be hard considering he had 0 sacks.
My bet is another incentive will be games played or active, and considering he started the season on PUP, that might not be hard for him, either.
So yes, this is a solid for Buffalo, but he may legitimately believe he's about to earn more than he was scheduled... and all of that money goes on next year's CAP.
Am I missing something? You think Von will get a bonus for 4 tackles?Bonuses are generally based on a total performance not necessarily related to the prior year. I would be shocked if Von triggered additional pay on his 4th tackle. That silly.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
If that is as reported it is a proper pay cut.
What I mean by that is it isn't a restructure and it isn't swapping non-guaranteed money for a smaller amount of guaranteed money.
Von's $17.5m salary this year was FULLY guaranteed. He is taking a near $9m pay cut (who knows what the incentives are). That is significant.
It seems that the term “restructure” is getting thrown out a lot for things that don’t typically fall under the use.Very curious of the implications for cutting Von. Not just next year, but even as early as this year post June 1.
-
2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:
Void year.
Yeah, that is what I thought.
I am being super pedantic, but I wish it was reported as "added a void year" rather than "restructure".
I get it. It is a restructure....but also it kind of isn't. -
12 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:
Spotrac is keeping up pretty well. It's -$16M with $10M added to the cap June 1st.
I saw that. I wasn't sure if that -$16M number was with or without Tre. He is in red but I still have the option to move on from him in the roster editor.
I cam here to ask and it has been answered. Thanks!-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:
Von has an out that only cost $15 million against the cap if cut him in 2025. I'd rather not touch that term with his status unknown for now.
34 minutes ago, Steptide said:Oh I didn't realize that
It does not "cost" us anything. Moving on from Von after this season nets us $8.45M in cap space.
Having Von on the roster in 2025 COSTS us $23.8M in cap space.
Removing Von from the roster in 2025 SAVES us $8.45M in cap space.When it comes to moving on from players the net is much more important than the dead cap number.
-
4
-
2
-
-
14 minutes ago, SoonerBillsFan said:
This move had to be made
Yeah. What a bummer. I love Tre. I’ll certainly be pouring one out for him later. Great dude, great teammate, great CB.-
1
-
Epenesa re-signing, 2-year deal
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Edmunds just named valedictorian at Sweet Home HS. Here’s to the graduating class of 2024!