QCity

dcjoev, Great post, but I'd like to clear up a few things. For the record, I've been involved in internet marketing in one form or the other since 1995 (yes, 1995 - an era when you could buy virtually any domain you wanted from Network Solutions for $100, and if you told people you had e-mail they though you were a scientist) This is my problem, you (and many, many others) seem to equate quantity with quality. The number of viewers a particular news article gets is not necessarily indicative of the quality or accuracy of the article. This doesn't just apply to websites, but rather all forms of media. By that logic the Twilight series should have been nominated for about 6 Oscars. American Idol packs them in. Would you consider that show to be the pinnacle of television? Internet marketing is all based on impressions i.e. how many pairs of eyeballs you can get on the page. It doesn't make a lick of difference if they agree or disagree with the article. It doesn't matter if the article is accurate and in most cases wildly inaccurate articles generate more traffic (see Walterfootball.com). It doesn't even really matter if they read it. They came to the page for a half second and ads were displayed. Insiders in internet marketing affectionately refer to sites like BR as "content mills" which operate by churning out as much content as possible to grab as much traffic as possible. Rather than have 1 page that gets 10 million visitors a day, these sites operate on the model of having 1 million pages that each get 10 visitors a day. Ever wonder why all those BR articles list "Top 20 Players Blah Blah" then make you click through 20 small 1-paragraph articles? Wouldn't it be easier to just list all 20 on one page and scroll down? Heh, 20 pages = 20 times the # of impressions and 20 more pages for the search engines. ESPN is firmly entrenched with espn.com. The majority of viewers don't arrive at espn.com from a search engine, they start at the main page and branch outward. BL on the other hand, (even with all it's traffic) is completely at the mercy of Google. Any minor change in Google's algorithm would have a massive effect on BR's traffic that would probably give the entire marketing department a nervous breakdown. I do respect writers that work hard to write accurate stories, and I'm sure BR has many of them. You said it yourself, it's tough to break into this business. But now it seems the best way to get noticed is to write sensational articles that "bait" fans into reading them. Take the March 12 article that starts out "Mike Wallace to Bills..." Now every fan in Pittsburgh and Buffalo is going to flock to read that. The problem is the article is complete bull ****. A fantasy dreamed up by a "featured columnist" that is about a 1000:1 shot. BR is in effect, trolling us! The sports fan in me just can't ever take this type of reporting seriously, however the marketer in me lauds BR with the highest of praise.

Yes, and the cash to cap number is the one we use!!! This is the number that determines if we can sign free agent X. This is how much we have to spend. And when we determine if can sign free agent X, we consider 100% of all bonuses applied toward this year, NOT amortized bonuses! See? It's just a simple example to illustrate the point of how bonuses are handled.. If you want a better one, look at Peppers' contract. He got like 1M his first year and 19M in bonuses. That would require 20M in free cash to cap space this year if we offered Mario the same deal. Whew, discussing the cap is tiring.

NOOOOOO! A cash to cap system DOES NOT amortize bonuses. Let's say Mario Williams wants 16M a year with a 20M signing bonus. The Bills will count all 36M of that amount against their cash to cap figure this year (of which they have at least $32M, probably a lot more as was stated). Now, the deal will be amortized under NFL rules and can easily be structed to fit under the cap, but that figure is meaningless because we aren't pressed up against the cap. Cash to cap ignores the amoritzation of NFL accounting, and that's the important number because that's what we have to spend.

and? My point was that they have to allot at least $15M for draft picks in their cash to cap system.

The Buffalo News has them at $20.9 million under the salary cap and $32.8 million under their cap in terms of actual cash spending. This includes the rollover and Johnson signing, but not Chandler and the Dallas/Wash thing.

I misspoke - it's fixed. I meant to say it counts 100% towards our cash to cap model(how much we can spend). Obviously the NFL amortizes it over the lifespan of the deal.

The Bills do not use amortization! Last year when we signed Dareus, his $13M signing bonus counted 100% towards our cash to cap. Last year the #10 pick got a 7.2M signing bonus. So under the cash to cap system, $12-$15M is more realistic. Takes a big bite out of that $30M+ figure, huh? Any free agents that get a signing bonus will count 100% too.

I got an idea. Is there a way to set up a board filter so that anytime someone types "Bleacher Report" it gets replaced with the text "Some Random Internet Blogger"?

"The problem, though, is that Buffalo's about to get squeezed by the new CBA rules. In 2013, the spending floor that the union fought to have included in the new bargaining agreement comes into play, which means that the Bills will need to spend 89 percent of the cap in cash on an annual basis. That means a payroll in excess of $100 million, and the Bills only have two ways to get there." From 2008-2010 the Bills averaged 92% of the cap in cash, well over the required 89%. Last year they spent $130M or 106% of the cap in cash, again, well over the required 89%. TLDR: The salary floor in 2013 won't faze us, Barnwell didn't do his research.

I agree with you 100%. If we do decide to start Hariston, we definitely need a solid backup. And that last thing I want to see is Mr Andy slide anywhere, he needs to start every single game at LG!

If you read my above post, we will most likely draft a LT in the 3rd/4th round to come in to compete with Hairston. You're acting like Bell is a lock to start 16 games, when in reality he's a huge risk.

It's really a tricky situation. Bell played very good at the start of the year, but you can't open up the checkbook and make a large long-term commitment with his injury history. It will be interesting to see what he is offered on the market. Even if Bell leaves, I do NOT think Nix will take a LT in the first round. His past history on grading linemen has been excellent - getting great value with pickups like Rinehart, Urbik and Pears. I think once again he will look to the waiver wire or later rounds for someone to compete with Hairston for the starting job. Don't discount Hairston either, remember he was only a 4th round pick who was called on to step into a starting role and performed admirably considering the circumstances.

Well it's a good thing you weren't a fan before 2008. Back then we had to pay for 2 pre-season games every year! Things were crazy in those days...

So true. This makes the Carson Palmer trade seem almost decent, and that was the worst trade in years. Rams fans should be dancing in the streets.

LOL

No, the two figures are completely different. The News calculates our free amount under the NFL amortized cap at $21M, and our cash to cap space at $33M (both minus Chandler). They also use a projected cash to cap ceiling of $132M and say the Bills should reserve about $15M for signing draft picks. I think the draft pick allotment is way too high, but that leaves about $17M to play with.

You're right, the $35M figure is the amortized one thrown about. I was using it to show how fast money dries up under the cash to cap system. This guy has our current 2012 cash spending at about $83M (last updated Feb 29 - before Stevie signed). If we use $120M as the approximate limit, figure $37M under. Of course, I haven't checked his numbers, but he does seem quite thorough.

Well, they've used it every year since then so we have to assume they will still use it unless we hear otherwise. Every reference from the FO seems to indicate they prefer the cash to cap system. Has anyone heard otherwise? People who don't understand the system incorrectly assume that we are flush with tens of millions to spend.

Heh, I just got done showing how fast that $35M dries up with this post.

According to NFL accounting, yes. Our cash to cap system ignores that however. Cash to cap is simple, it basically means that if you spend money this year, it goes against the cap. I know it sounds crazy, but it's designed to prevent teams from mortgaging their future. I think about half the teams in the league use this system.

OK, we did roll over the $21M and had about $35M to play with. I used the word "had" because that was last week. Stevie's base salary for 2012 is $2.5M with an $8.5M signing bonus. So that's $11M, which drops that $35M figure down to $24M. Now, we don't know what Chandler signed for yet, but let's guess $3M. Just a guess, not even going to include a signing bonus. That $24M is down to $21M. OK, let's not forget about the draft! Conventional wisdom with the new draft salaries says that teams should allot at least $5M for the draft. That figure goes up if a team picks in the top 5. So let's say $5M and now we are down to $16M. So even with $16M left, we still haven't talked about resigning our remaining players like Bell. And in addition to resigning our own, we still will need to have to some cash to go after 2nd and 3rd tier FA's normally used for backup roles. All of a sudden that $35M is looking more like $10-$12M. Now remember, if we do sign a big name FA, even if we backload his deal we still need to fit his signing bonus into that figure. That's pretty much the reality of the situation.

Not really. The Bills operate on the cash to cap model. This means that any roster or signing bonuses will count 100% this year. How much "cap space" we have is really irrelevant.

Tell us how you came to this conclusion. Is it a long history of stadium renovating experience, or did you figure out what it would cost to fix your house siding, then scale it up?

I'd bet that most people on this board had no idea who Mario Williams even was, then saw his name on the free agent list and quickly checked his stats on ESPN.

Yup. That's the only thing he's done. Bahahaha, ok you got me. I fell for it.