In-A-Gadda-Levitre

and there's this from Sammy...

I don't disagree. What I think happened is that Parker says $9M (top of all safeties), the Bills say $7M (top 4-5 FSs), Parker ignores it, the Bills leak hey, we offered top 4-5, and it goes nowhere. As far as Berry's deal goes, remember he was 5th overall in the last class before the new CBA went into play...

So Benigni's tweet is wrong, they offered Top 3 safety money? Top 4-5 is $7.4M - $8M

If you're talking about the value of the Franchise Tag, yes, but just safeties, not all DBs. CBs are paid $10.854M as a non-exclusive tag. This is about your figure of $8.25M as what the Bills offered, because you're using all safeties as the base, not the CBA calculation of the Franchise Tag. IMO, this is not true. It's like saying a RT is worth what a LT makes.

One more time, Byrd is a Free Safety, so throw out Berry's and Polamalu's numbers and you have: #1- $ 9.2 - Antrele Rolle #2- $ 9.0 - Dashon Goldson #3- $ 8.6 - Eric Weddle #4- $ 6.9 - Jairus Byrd #5- $ 6.3 - Michael Griffin Not sure what why the Cap Hit is the number you used, but it doesn't change the picture much when you take out Strong Safety.

You don't seem to want to let go of the $8,25M figure and Benigni's tweet. Byrd is a FS, and if he was offered top 4-5 FS money, that's in the low $7M neighborhood. The conventional wisdom says that when a team offers $2M less than Parker's magic number, he ignores it. If the Bills were within $750K, a deal could have been done. They weren't, mostly likely because of the value the team placed on Byrd, his PF, and a new scheme, which presents enough unknowns to make the Bills wary of committing big $.

WGR quoted Mark Kelso, who is said to a be a personal friend of Byrd, that Byrd wants $9M and the Bills (apparently) offered $7M... and according to Tim Graham, the top FSs are: So ya, it was top 4-5

Where does the bolded part come from. I was under the impression the Bills never made AL an offer, probably because it wasn't going to be close to what the FA market would pay, so they let him walk. There was no shortage of articles on Levitre waiting for an offer. If you meant what the Bills offered Byrd, most of the people who know about these things, said the Bills were closer to $7m (~$2M less than the $9M Byrd was seeking).

they decided to keep him on the active roster, he won't go to PUP .

I'm curious, why do you think the Bills brought him in and signed him, given those limitations? Just really lousy alternatives?

here's an audio track, Florio is babbling in the beginning. The audio player says Track #1, click on the "1" and you'll be at the start of TG's interview. He doesn't say anything really controversial, except near the end, when he's asked about the Byrd situation, no surprise... then there's so much static, that it's unintelligible, which (to me) is really embarrassing and then the call is dropped. He's on his cell phone and talking to a national sports media show on live tv. Seems like he could've made sure he was in a place where he had a good signal, but I'm no Tim Graham.

I'm no expert, I suppose you're right, Byrd and his agent could conceivably come to some agreement in principle, but they'd have to get the Bills to agree (ie compensation, because they could tag him again..). The situation is the same if he has a great season; the Bills can sign him to a multi-year agreement, tag him again, trade him, or let him sign with another team with some killer compensation. to me, it was the player may sign only a one-year Player Contract with his Prior Club that excluded him from doing anything else. You're right, the Breer article didn't address trades. I only linked it to show the changes to the tag rule (via the new CBA) that allowed teams to continually tag a player, at a cost...

no, it's not true. Albert Breer explains how can you interpret the rule as he can sign a long term deal with another club after 7/15?

ok, so this timeline in Bleacher Report is interesting.. the article then quotes Werder's retake BUT, Adam Schefter's Tweet is now mysteriously deleted from his feed...

another link in the Byrd convo on Rotoworld

Belichick, the great communicator....

right, if you read his Twitter feed, he stirred up a hornet's nest by posing a what-if, thinking out loud scenario, so I'm guessing he continues the controversial approach to keep the page views going up...

1) read my previous post, because the Fox execs want what Disney has, real bottom line revenue with positive growth. 2) nothing has changed. you act like their $40B valuation has declined, quite the opposite; it's still growing. FY13Q2 Disney earnings jumped 3) let's say you're right, and it's all about brand loyalty. So Fox Sports grows at the expense of ESPN. Do you think Time-Warner or Comcast is going to offer you a choice over which sports network you watch? No, it'll either be part of a sports tier and both with be carried, or part of your basic cable. ESPN still wins with affiliate revenue. They simply aren't affected that much by losing some eyeballs to Fox.

I have trouble believing that Byrd will do anything but prepare and play flat out this year. He wants the big bucks, from the Bills or whomever he gets traded to, signs with as a free agent, etc. Having a stellar year is the only way he gets there. His job is to prove to the Bills, and every other team, that he is the best safety in the league, and deserves to paid like he is.

ESPN makes most of its money from affiliate revenues, and that is growing every year, and has a substantial impact on Disney's bottom line. Last year Forbes named ESPN as the world's most valuable media property. and My guess is, rather than viewing ESPN being weak as a result of it's poor programming, Fox believes that they can build a valuable cable property and charge real money just like ESPN. Will they create a situation where ESPN isn't able to get the carriage fees it currently demands remains to be seen.

fixed

Les Carpenter had some serious access in OBD

You're right, and as Brian Billick points out, pretty much every NFL team has security personnel who use their contacts to get info for upper management to assist them in making informed decisions.

The Blackberries, aka Humble Pie's backup singers; Venetta Fields, Clydie King and Sherlie Matthews. Venetta was born in Buffalo, and all three ladies sang with many famous bands. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqsMKvkzdwc

Peter Schrager inaccurately tweeted it was fully-guaranteed, and CBS Sports ran with it.