Tuco

Next year? What do your sources say about this year?

There's a big difference between tagging and trading now compared to back when they did it with Peerless Price. In PP's days you could tag the guy and then try to trade him. If you couldn't find a trade partner you could just let him go at any time all the way through training camp or even the season, or keep him at the tag rate and continue to negotiate or try to trade him. Ever since the 2006 CBA a tagged player can sign the tag tender and that money then becomes 100% guaranteed. Additionally, teams and tagged players only have until mid-July to reach long term deals or the player must play under the tag amount for the season. Those two factors make tagging a player with the intent of trading him much riskier than it used to be. In Gilmore's case, all he has to do is walk in and sign the tender and either the Bills or a new team are stuck paying a guaranteed $12+ million (with a $12+ million cap charge). This is a huge bargaining chip for Gilmore. Not only against the Bills but against any team that might want to trade for him. This is why you almost never see any players tagged and traded any more. And also why if a team is intent on not letting the player go for nothing they usually use the franchise tag instead. It's usually only a couple million more but gives the team a few more advantages if the player really wants to leave.

He already has $40.5 mil guaranteed in his first 2 years if he stays two years - or $30.5 mil guaranteed if he's only here 1 year. Your scenario doesn't add any money in the first 2 years.

$12M

Right. They either keep him beyond March 11th and choose how to apply his guaranteed money (exercise the option) or they cut him before March 11th to avoid paying any guaranteed money.

That is not true at all. He is under contract. The option isn't an option to extend his contract - a lot of people think it is, but it isn't. Tyrod Taylor's contract calls for him to make $27.5 mil in 2017. That money becomes guaranteed if he's still on the roster on March 11th. The option everyone refers to is the option to take $15.5 million of that salary and convert it into a proratable signing bonus. It's a misnomer when people say "pick up the option" to think that means not picking up the option means cutting him. They are 2 different things. What people really mean is the Bills have to decide whether to cut Taylor or keep him before March 11th when it all becomes guaranteed, and if they keep him they have the option to convert a large chunk of it into a bonus.

The franchise tag is only good for players whose contracts expire on March 9th. And it has to be applied to a player before March 1st. TT's contract doesn't expire on March 8th. Contrary to popular belief, it doesn't expire on March 11th either - regardless of whether they pick up the option. The option in Taylor's contract isn't an option for the Bills to extend his contract. His contract runs through 2021. The option is whether the Bills decide to either pay TT's guaranteed $27.5 mil entirely as 2017 salary or to convert $15.5 million of that salary into a signing bonus that can be prorated. The other option the Bills have is to release (cut) Taylor before the guarantee kicks in (March 11th). If they do that, TT immediately becomes an unrestricted free agent - not a pending free agent whose contract is set to run out. And they all knew exactly what they were doing. Lots of players have large option bonuses due in the first couple days of the league year. This is nothing new. It's negotiated that way by the players in order to force a team into deciding whether to keep them or cut them loose without making the player wait until July or August to find out.

No I was talking about guaranteed money to the other poster who was claiming he's only guaranteed $27 mil on a 5 year deal. But that's not true. As soon as the league year starts in 2018 TT's entire 2018 salary becomes guaranteed. That means it's a $27.5 mil guarantee if we only keep him one year. If we keep him for 2+ years as everyone suggests, it's a $40.5 million guarantee.

Neither tag is an option. The tags are for players who will become free agents when their contracts expire on March 9th. TT is under contract through 2021 unless the Bills release him. You can't cut a player and then put the tag on him.

It's $27.5 mil guaranteed if we keep him for 1 year. That's higher than top 15ish. As soon as the second year starts his guaranteed money goes up to $40.5 mil on the 5 year contract..

$18.35M

This thread reminds me of typing "misheard lyrics - Yellow Ledbetter" on Utoob. But for all intensive purposes it's good for a laugh. I couldn't go from one post to the next without chuckling, little lone trying to read the whole thing at once. PS - I voted for Tom Coughlin. Not for nothin' but I figure since he started his head coaching career at RIT that's close enough to Buffalo to qualify him as the best Particle Sun this half-fast thread can a bite by. Make me fries.

Ha ha good catch. Last I knew the place was actually making that "Jamaican" Red Stripe beer.

Whenever I'm flying back from Florida on New Year's Day I always stop off in Latrobe, PA. Gotta get a six pack of Rolling Rock to start the year off right ya know.

I understand that. My response was mostly in response to the article questioning whether it was an illegal act - which seems like quite a stretch.

Maybe the ref screwed up but it's not a question of legality - or broken rules. It's not like the kicker brings his own ball out on the field and says I'll kick this one. The official is supposed to bring out a K ball (which he's supposed to get from the official K ball ball boy) when it's an obvious kicking play. If the ref screwed up he screwed up. Are we looking for a conspiracy? Did the ball boy purposely slip the official a QB ball for the kick? Ball boys are employees of the home team. Did the Phish secretly plant a double agent ball boy in our midst? I can see the Pats* doing something like that. But the Phish? Come on man.

Taken by itself it looks to be very clear. But keep in mind the whole paragraph is precluded by "Not withstanding any language to the contrary in this Contract but subject to the terms and conditions of this section . . . " -- These kinds of introductory sentences are common in all contracts and usually point to some other area where other things are written that often make the meaning of the rest of the paragraph less clear (without being able to see the other sections). Additionally, all NFL contracts are drawn from a standard form that includes a paragraph that describes the player's right to injury grievance if terminated while injured (including second opinions and appealing the team physician's opinion), as well as language in the CBA regarding the same thing - and the CBA supercedes all contract language. While there are provisions in the CBA and in the standard contract that allow for certain changes from the standard contract form (they all start with a clause using the "notwithstanding" phrase too, LOL), I personally find it hard to believe this one sentence we're being shown is enough to overrule all those other provisions. I tend to believe it's written this way knowing full well the player has the right to a second opinion and an appeal, rather than redundantly specify all that information all over again. Basically saying, if our doc says you're fit you're fit - and there's no reason for us to further specify that you can disagree and appeal because all that is already included in the CBA and the standard part of the contract. But I have been wrong before. EDIT: I'd like to add writing it this way also allows for a definite time line. The doc says he's fit, contract voided. Now it's up to the player to appeal. But writing it saying the player has the rights to a second opinion, etc. before he can be terminated could drag the process of actually cutting TT well beyond the trigger date. And that would add a whole extra layer of cloudiness in the event they do cut him and he says he's injured.

Yes, they do count against the cap. So you can't throw them out or ignore them when talking about the contract.

10-4. Way too much to risk unless someone really thinks the light will come on in the next 3 weeks. But I wouldn't bench him. He's a hard worker, giving us his best. And he gave us an out with his contract that still paid him well for the year. So I'm all for the pulled a hamstring in practice Wednesday morning routine so he's be relegated to 3rd string emergency QB. At which point I would wrap him in bubble wrap, hand him a clipboard, and not let him stand too close to the sidelines.

It's not fully guaranteed. Skurski says in the video that the "option" the Bills have is fully guaranteed. The OP mis-stated that the contract is fully guaranteed. If the Bills exercise the option bonus, that's $15.5 mil next year that is then treated like a signing bonus (guaranteed and paid but prorated for cap purposes over 5 years). Additionally his $12 mil salary for 2017 would also be guaranteed. If they don't pay the option as a bonus but also don't cut him before then either, it becomes a guaranteed $27.5 mil salary for 2017. Either way it's $27.5 mil guaranteed if we don't cut him loose. And, if TT gets injured playing football and is still injured on March 11th (or whatever day it is) 2017, that same $27.5 mil is still guaranteed. That's a lot to risk if you are convinced TT's not the future (too much to risk IMO), but it's nowhere near the same as saying his whole contract is fully guaranteed if he's injured.

Probably the Jest. Big city and all.

Dude's going to have so many tags on his bags they'll think he's carrying a peacock.

The game is already at 4:00. And we're talking about flexing into prime time at 8:30.

Here's a pretty good look at it- http://sports.morganwick.com/category/football/nfl/snf-flex-scheduling-watch/ NBC’s Sunday Night Football package gives it flexible scheduling. For the last seven weeks of the season, the games are determined on 12-day notice, 6-day notice for Week 17. The first year, no game was listed in the Sunday Night slot, only a notation that one game could move there. Now, NBC lists the game it “tentatively” schedules for each night. However, the NFL is in charge of moving games to prime time. Here are the rules from the NFL web site (note that this was originally written with the 2007 season in mind and has been only iteratively and incompletely edited since then, hence why at one point it still says late games start at 4:15 ET instead of 4:25): Begins Sunday of Week 5 In effect during Weeks 5-17 Up to 2 games may be flexed into Sunday Night between Weeks 5-10 Only Sunday afternoon games are subject to being moved into the Sunday night window. The game that has been tentatively scheduled for Sunday night during flex weeks will be listed at 8:15 p.m. ET. The majority of games on Sundays will be listed at 1:00 p.m. ET during flex weeks except for games played in Pacific or Mountain Time zones which will be listed at 4:05 or 4:15 p.m. ET. No impact on Thursday, Saturday or Monday night games. The NFL will decide (after consultation with CBS, FOX, NBC) and announce as early as possible the game being played at 8:15 p.m. ET. The announcement will come no later than 12 days prior to the game. The NFL may also announce games moving to 4:05 p.m. ET and 4:25 p.m. ET. Week 17 start time changes could be decided on 6 days notice to ensure a game with playoff implications. The NBC Sunday night time slot in “flex” weeks will list the game that has been tentatively scheduled for Sunday night. Fans and ticket holders must be aware that NFL games in flex weeks are subject to change 12 days in advance (6 days in Week 17) and should plan accordingly. NFL schedules all games. Teams will be informed as soon as they are no longer under consideration or eligible for a move to Sunday night. Rules NOT listed on NFL web site but pertinent to flex schedule selection: CBS and Fox each protect games in five out of six weeks starting Week 11, and cannot protect any games Week 17. Games were protected after Week 4 in 2006 and 2011, because NBC hosted Christmas night games those years and all the other games were moved to Saturday (and so couldn’t be flexed), but are otherwise protected after Week 5; I’m assuming protections were due in Week 4 again this year, and the above notwithstanding, Week 10 is part of the main flex period this year, as it was in 2006 and 2011 (and yes I goofed up by not writing this post last week). As I understand it, during the Week 5-10 period the NFL and NBC declare their intention to flex out a game two weeks in advance, at which point CBS and Fox pick one game each to protect. Three teams can appear a maximum of six games in primetime on NBC, ESPN or NFL Network (everyone else gets five) and no team may appear more than four times on NBC, although starting this year Week 17 is exempt from team appearance limits. No team starts the season completely tapped out at any measure; nine teams have five primetime appearances each, but only the Texans don’t have games in the main flex period, though they don’t have any early-flex games left either. NBC appearances for all teams: CAR 2 (1 flexible), DEN 3 (1 semi-flexible, 1 flexible), NE 3 (1 semi-flexible, 1 flexible), ARI 2 (1 semi-flexible), GB 3 (1 flexible), MIN 1, CHI 1, DAL 3 (1 semi-flexible, 1 flexible), KC 2 (1 flexible), PIT 3 (2 flexible), NYG 2 (1 flexible), IND 2 (flexible), HOU 1, SEA 3 (2 semi-flexible, 1 flexible), PHI 1 (semi-flexible), OAK 1 (semi-flexible), WAS 1 (flexible), NYJ 1 (flexible), CIN 1 (flexible). All primetime appearances for all teams: CAR 5 (1 flexible), DEN 5 (1 semi-flexible, 1 flexible), NE 5 (2 flexible), ARI 4 (1 semi-flexible), GB 5 (1 flexible), MIN 4, CHI 4, DAL 5 (1 semi-flexible, 1 flexible), KC 3 (1 flexible), PIT 5 (2 flexible), NYG 5 (1 flexible), IND 3 (2 flexible), HOU 5, SEA 5 (1 semi-flexible, 2 flexible), PHI 4 (1 semi-flexible), OAK 3 (1 semi-flexible), WAS 3 (1 flexible), NYJ 5 (1 flexible), CIN 4 (1 flexible), LA 2, SF 2, ATL 2, NO 2, TB 2, BUF 2, BAL 3, MIA 2, all other teams 1. Briefly, here are the current early-season games and their prospects for being flexed out: Week 7: Seattle (3-1) @ Arizona (2-3). A fairly mediocre contest, but nowhere near the sort of emergency that would warrant pulling the early flex considering the protection rules. No chance of being flexed out. Week 8: Philadelphia (3-1) @ Dallas (4-1). The Cowboys never, ever, get flexed out in any case; when it’s a matchup with the NFC East lead potentially on the line? No chance of being flexed out. Week 9: Denver (4-1) @ Oakland (4-1). Two one-loss teams fighting for the AFC West lead adds up to a game that won’t see any available game overcome the tentative game bias. No chance of being flexed out. Here are the current tentatively-scheduled games and my predictions: Week 10 (November 13): Tentative game: Seattle @ New England Prospects: 3-1 v. 4-1, which is nearly impossible to beat. Likely protections: Broncos-Saints but probably nothing (CBS) and Cowboys-Steelers (FOX). Other possible games: Falcons-Eagles would be a strong contender against a weaker tentative (and might have been protected if the Cowboys were facing a weaker opponent), and Vikings-Skraelings finds itself lost in the shuffle. Packers-Titans is a dark horse. Week 11 (November 20): Tentative game: Green Bay @ Washington Prospects: 3-1 v. 3-2, not quite as hard to beat as Seahawks-Patriots, but pretty strong. Likely protections: Ravens-Cowboys or Eagles-Seahawks (CBS) and probably Cardinals-Vikings if anything (FOX). Other possible games: Besides CBS’ unprotected game, the only other options involve teams below .500, with Bills-Bengals and Buccaneers-Chiefs being the most viable, and Titans-Colts as a very dark horse. Week 12 (November 27): Tentative game: New England @ NY Jets Prospects: 4-1 v. 1-4. Very lopsided, but could be hard pressed to lose its spot under the circumstances. Likely protections: Chiefs-Broncos (CBS) and Cardinals-Falcons, Rams-Saints, Seahawks-Bucs, or nothing (FOX). Other possible games: Thanksgiving Weekend, paucity of good games, and this year seems to have gotten unusually lucky in terms of good teams on Thanksgiving and Monday night (across those four games only the Colts and Lions have three or more losses). Bengals-Ravens, Cardinals-Falcons, and Seahawks-Bucs are the best options. Week 13 (December 4): Tentative game: Carolina @ Seattle Prospects: 1-4 v. 3-1, with the Panthers’ struggles making this unfortunately lopsided. Likely protections: Texans-Packers (CBS) and Rams-Patriots, Giants-Steelers, or Eagles-Bengals (FOX). Other possible games: Chiefs-Falcons and Bills-Raiders are reasonably strong contenders, along with whichever game(s) are unprotected between Rams-Patriots and Giants-Steelers (I think the former is most likely). Racial Slurs-Cardinals is a dark horse. Week 14 (December 11): Tentative game: Dallas @ NY Giants Prospects: 4-1 v. 2-3 is not great, but the Cowboys never get flexed out of SNF under any circumstances and certainly not when they’re playing this well. Likely protections: Steelers-Bills if anything (CBS) and Seahawks-Packers (FOX). Other possible games: Native Americans-Eagles is good enough I considered listing them as an option for the protection, and Falcons-Rams is a good option as well. Broncos-Titans and Texans-Colts are dark horses. Week 15 (December 18): Tentative game: Pittsburgh @ Cincinnati Prospects: 4-1 v. 2-3, like Cowboys-Giants not great, and the name value of the teams doesn’t insulate this game nearly as well. Likely protections: Patriots-Broncos (CBS) and Eagles-Ravens (FOX). Other possible games: The good news for this game is that the only remaining options also involve 2-3 teams: Titans-Chiefs, Colts-Vikings, or Bucs-Cowboys, with Lions-Giants as a dark horse. Week 17 (January 3): Playoff positioning watch begins Week 9.

That's how it used to be in the days before the salary cap. Teams could only have a 47 man roster plus injured reserve. No inactives or practice squads guys or anything. So they would stash young players and minor injured players on IR and bring them back later. All teams did it. With no salary cap and no disclosure of salaries teams could pay these guys whatever they wanted. IR basically acted as a practice squad. When the salary cap came in they had to do something so they said okay you can now have 53 on your roster but still only dress 47 on game day. That gives each team flexibility with short term injuries. They also created the practice squads. And also a special list (PUP) for guys who were injured from the previous season and weren't ready yet. At that time they said that should be enough roster availability for everybody (53+8+1+PUP list available). IR was then designated as gone for the season to avoid any further stashing. Then that wasn't good enough so they increased the size of the practice squads to 10. Then they allowed a IR-DFR. Then they allow the newest rule where you can pick the one who returns instead of pre-designating. All of this slowly chips away at the pool of money the players get. If you allowed them to put as many guys on IR as they wanted and bring them back when they wanted every team would have 8 high paid studs and 100 players making league minimum. So there has to be limits set forth in the CBA.