JoeF

Creative in the sense of the structuring of contracts...gauranteed years -- higher base salaries in the first years of the deal rather than the last years. We are taking amoritization off the table as a tool and a factor here--we have to be creative. That was the point...... Again--if we sign a player say for 5 years at $25 Million, the Bills may break the contract as all base salaries something like: $8 Million (Y1); $7 Million (y2); $4 M (Y3); $3M (y4); $3M (y5) and gaurantee the first 2 or 3 years of the contract in place of a signing bonus..its a risk--but we have to be creative. There are some advantages in this method that may help attract players--withholding taxes are lower for a salary spread over 17 game checks than one large bonus check; The gauranteed years may be something that not every team is willing to do--and it is a risk because of injury and simply non performance. For the same contract another team--say the Washington Snyderskins -- may structure the contact $10M SB and salaries of $750K; $3M; $3.25M; $4M; $4M--amoritizing the sigining bonus--cap hits would be: $2.75M (Y1); $5M(Y2); $5.25 (Y3); $6M (y4); $6M (y5) This is a really simple example (Clumpy is probably ready to kill me) -- because there are no roster bonuses or other incentive clauses involved--but what the Bills are really doing is NOT spending cap minimum, they will spend most of the cap...they are eliminating amoritization as a factor in future contracts. It hurts us from a competitive standpoint -- probably a lot for the top tier free agents -- so we have to structure contracts in a way that allows us advantage.

Can--you sound like Tim Hardaway (just kidding)....embrace the youngsters -- They aren't so bad... They don't understand the back to back 2-14 years; the late 60's and late 70's and the team that dominated the AFL in the mid-60's...they're our next generation--us old foggies need to be mentors to the young lasses and lads....

I don't know about wanting to trade him. I really think Marv was being honest. What Willis said didn't end up on his or Ralph's "care about" radar. I was half waiting for Marv to say-- "You know--Frannie won't let me even read Penthouse for the articles" or something coy...but I get the impression that he really didn't care. As long as Willis stays within the law he can say whatever he desires. I feel strongly that Willis will be a Bill this year...I have been wrong before and will be again..

thanks blfodan....great post. We will see where these next couple of years go--but you know what--the longer Marv Levy has direct involvement with the happenings at OBD the better in my book. By the way, Marv's book is awesome. If you haven't read it...take a gander.. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/158...g2=eyegetcom-20

Ko as a defensive lineman...brilliant!!! That is the type of strategic thinking we need to put us over the top...

Its not a good thing BillsVet--you are dead on. Unfortunately its reality for the Bills and there are ways to get creative to make it work. Believe me its not the preferred method -- but we kind of have to deal with the world the way it is not the way we wish it would be.

If you check the record -- I am only a smart ass when someone posts something so insanely stupid that it warrants such a response. Its obvious you are mad about potentially losing Nate-- but violating a contract verbal or written-- (and by the way -- Marv acknowledged yesterday that its written and its standard practice---the Seahawks did it with Shaun Alexander 2 years ago) is just idiotic. Quit posting like a 12 year old and I will quit being a smart ass.

Listen to the press conference--Marv said they believe Royal can do a lot more but they had to keep him into block too often on passing downs. Said TE was not a priority

You mean there is hope??? Wow...

This is an interesting concept....one that I am sure would be very popular with the other 1600 players in the league. It would make us beloved destination all the more--with the interesting weather, high taxes, cap inflexibility and now add untrustworthy management... Cool! I am for it -- let's give it a try..

What?????? What??????? What??????

We are McDonald's to the rest of the league's Outback.... We are Dunkin Donuts to the rest of the league's Starbucks We are Topps to the rest of the league's Wegmans We are Chevy to the rest of the league's Mercedes

Which TBDer would we franchise if they were a free agent?

I love your opinions...you are like the Iraqi Minister of Information during Sadaam's reign. Your opinions are wonderful humor.. Thanks for being you. Better yet, for the scoreboard screen, we can show Bills games when they move to Toronto and Ralph lives out the few years he has left drowning in cash...

The aggregate spend really depends on how creative we are.... Let's look at it this way... Say one of our free agents is: CB X - who signs for 5 years with a two tiered bonus...$7.5 Million up front; $4 Million in 2008 and base salaries $750K; $1.75 Million. $3 Million, $4 Million and $4 Million -- In the Bills New Math the cash is - $8.25 Million, $5.75 Million, $3 Million, $4 Million, $4 Million and we call all of these BASE Salaries -- not a bonus but all base. We can do things here with gauranteed years that don't kill us but may give us some competitive advantages in the market against teams who have mortgaged their futures with amoritization charges In NFL Cap if they are treated as bonuses - $2.25 M, $4.25M, $5.5 Million, $6.5 Million, $6.5 Million So in the first year we take a cash to the cap expense of $6 million more than the NFL's cap hit if we used the amoritized bonus strategy and $1.5 Million more in the second year-in years 3, 4 and 5 the cap hit is actually less allowing us to bring in more talent..my sense is that we will do what Minnesota did a couple years back with Winfield and call these large upfront payments "Salary" for the first year--so we will in fact not leave any cap money on the table but spend to the cap...this also in a wierd way might make the Bills more attractive to the guys we want to keep or attact--rather than taxes being withheld from a large bonus check--taxes are withheld from 17 game checks -- a smaller amount of taxes.. I think there are ways we can use this philosophy to our advantage -- but to state unequivocally that we will not spend to the cap could be less than factual -- what is factual is that we won't leverage the full buying power of the cap the way that other teams who use the amoritization factor to their advantage do..but it makes us more nimble, able to adjust year to year to talent that leaves because we always have room to spare...we just can't go after that "load up for a run" year...

Exactly Obie Wan.....creativity, scouting prowess, not Dan Snyder but just good hard personnel work and good coaching...We are the Oakland A's and/or the Minnesota Twins -- even without a cap they compete almost every year...I am excited we are spending as much as we are...

Mad--I think the instruction is from Ralph is not to consider amoritization...the Bills aren't following the system--they are dealing only in real dollars -- read the accompanying articles on bb.com...its not great--but its what we have to deal with--and I think they can make it work if they get creative.

From CB: CASH TO CAP 101: The reason why I don't believe Clements, Fletcher or Kelsay will be re-signed is because the money they will be offered on the open market will be too exhorbitant to justify the Bills spending that kind of real cash. Clements is likely to get a bonus in the $15-$20 million range. Fletcher is likely looking at a bonus in the $8-$10 million range and Kelsay could fit somewhere in the $5-$10 million area. So if you take that guaranteed money on the low end and add them together, 15+8+5=28 million. You've re-signed your top three guys, but you haven't addressed the offensive or defensive lines and if the Bills tender just two restricted free agents at the low tender ($850K) that's another $1.7 million and you're done. I asked Marv and he confirmed that their approach will be more narrow in free agency and the number of free agents signed will be less (4 or 5 probably). That means maybe one big name acquisition and the rest likely second tier players that can help. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ So I don't especially like the fact that we aren't considering amoritization of bonuses--especially when you consider that the cap will rise each year allowing you to absorb some of the amoritization. I think there probably is a wink-wink with Littman and Ralph that if the right guy is there we go for it. I also think there is probably some instruction to get creative--particularly on the lines--maybe some guaranteed years and tiered bonuses with the gauranteed money being spread over more time. A smart agent and financial advisor can leverage these scenarios to tax advantages for the player. I think I see some financial creativity on the horizon in our contracts.

I just burned my Flutie, Spielman, Bledsoe and my personalized #1 dad jerseys...damn -.....My daughter wouldn't let me have her pink McGahee jersey--should I be worried?

...and it is a pleasure you know...

For about $2 million a year we got a starting TE For about $3 Million a year we got a rotational DT For about $2 million a year we got a starting Center For about $2 million a year each we got a #2 and a #3 WR For about $2 million a year we secured a rotational DE who would make about $4 million a year this year For about vet min we got a vet RB who carried the load for games when Willis was injured and a WR who turned into one of our better special teams players Check the market rate for these positions before you continue to spew your crap...Everyone but Peerless Price and Larry Tripplett would make more money if they were on the market this year--and Tripplett would make the same... We also drafted 2 first year starters in Whitner and Simpson and several role players (Pennington, Ellison, Williams) who were forced to play this year but also have the potential to be a solid foundation on a 53 man roster That's not failure -- that's a makeover... Bud, you're entitled to your opinion -- but at least come to the table with more than Marv sucks...

You have to make choices. One choice is whether to base a free agency philosophy on paying an astronomical price for an established name free agent or build a scouting staff that can spot an up and coming talent and secure the player right when they are on the cusp of improving. Fowler and Royal for example probably had their best years as pros last year and we signed them to reasonable deals that will keep them here for years to come. Are they pro bowlers -- no-- but they are serviceable parts who if either hit the market this year -- would command more than they did last year. This is our philosophy when it comes to free agency--work like hell to retain our guys who we want to retain (Nate and Kelsay) -- and fill holes with up and comers..rather than shopping on Rodeo Drive we are shopping on Transit Road...its not panic time...its roll up your sleeves and scout and coach and teach time...Will they keep Nate--who knows. Did Marv tire of London's ability to make a bunch of tackles 6 yards off the line--yep... This is a hell of a lot more fun for me...its blue collar, low ego approach -- it fits this team and it fits Buffalo--let's just go do it...

I was pretty satisfied with the overall content.... 4 or 5 targeted free agents Build through the Draft Motivated the existing players without tipping his hand too much If he really wanted to get into the money stuff they could have had Overdorf there. They didn't want to talk about money--that was obvious from his evasive almost uniformed answers. I think that was done on purpose. Marv is more like Yoda to this team--overall good Kharma but not the day to day guy....it showed a bit--but why tip your hand more than he did...

Foster have proven to be the Jonas Jennings of the RB position....you are correct my brown fizzy water friend...

Wonder if it could be with Thurman....