HappyDays

Neither will Metcalf's. That's how all these contracts are structured. Notice how we haven't even seen the guaranteed money for his new deal with Pittsburgh yet. Every time we give a big extension to our own players I'm told "ignore the reported number." But when we miss out on another player I'm told "wow the reported number is way too expensive." Personally I would trade Rousseau and Bernard in 2026 for Metcalf now. And yes I understand it's not exactly that simple but that is effectively what the numbers work out to be. Like I said I really hope I'm wrong. I'm not rooting against the team. I just see a consistent pattern of the same mistake made by this front office and to me this is the latest example of that mistake. If you disagree, that's fine. We'll see if the defensive players perform up to their contract values and if the WR room is good enough. I respect that. I very strongly disagree but at least you're accepting that the trade off is real.

It's just math. Beane has to be right about these decisions. Historically he has not been right about the contracts he's given out. I hope my opinion on this is wrong of course. I would love nothing more than for Rousseau to take a big step and for Beane to get the WR room right.

So there you go, Rousseau's contract officially hurt us from getting Metcalf. Rousseau + Bernard = $32.5M AAV. Metcalf got $30M AAV. These extensions don't happen in a vacuum. They have a measurable impact on our ability to add game changers.

It's $30M AAV, exactly what was reported. Nothing about the trade compensation or the money is shocking. This was the known asking price. Rousseau plus Bernard's AAV more than makes up for it. Beane chose the two solid players over the one great player. That decision is emblematic of his strategy in general and it hasn't gotten us over the hump.

Like I said in the previous thread this is a massive massive discount. He could have gotten $65M or even $70M AAV. Hopefully Beane knows how big this discount is and uses it appropriately.

Whelp there you go. The cold weather excuse is gone. We didn't make this trade because Beane didn't want to. And if our outside WRs struggle as badly as they did last year, this will be the latest example of him failing to add to the room. I really hope he has some kind of plan.

Right. And Seattle fired their OC.

Most likely scenarios in my mind are Metcalf, Hendrickson, or somewhat less exciting would be a big Allen extension which I also anticipate happening this offseason.

This is a legit insider. He has FA and trade news often times days before they're reported. Who knows what player he's referring to but he's indicating we'll be making some kind of big move soon.

No, he's a great player. He is not in the elite of the elite Jefferson/Chase/Brown tier. He is in the next tier down which features like 10 WRs that you can rank in whatever order you choose. Yes these are highlights, but let's be honest you can count the number of active players capable of some of these plays on one hand. Allen has never had a talent like this on the team. Diggs was of course elite in his prime but very different style. To me this is the prototypical WR to mesh with Allen. The WR analog to Rousseau would be someone like Jakobi Meyers. A nice player that you like to have on your team but you don't want him being your best player at that position and you don't want to pay him like a top 10 player. FWIW I agree that $30M is an overpay for Metcalf. But so what? 90% of contract extension are overpays. That's just the price of doing business. Why are Bills fans so ready to turn their nose up at overpaying elite players while praising overpaying players like Rousseau and Bernard?

I don't think it does. We could still afford Hendrickson for example if they really wanted to. My concern is that when you overpay too many good not great players, eventually it catches up with you and then on the rare occasion when elite players become available you're shut out of the market. Look at the DK Metcalf thread - a lot of fans balking over paying him $30M AAV. The reality is we should want a $30M AAV player on our roster. All the other contenders have players worth that kind of money. Only in Buffalo do we have fans praising $20M for a solid player while saying we can't afford a top 100 player.

If we have to pay a Buffalo tax, so be it. Give Seattle the exact draft capital they're looking for plus an extra $2M per season. Make John Schneider and Metcalf's agent happy, they'll team up to convince him it's a good move. I hope we don't quibble over minor details because we feel it's unfair or whatever. The past couple weeks have proven elite talents are not going to just hit the market all that often. This is our shot, do what it takes and worry about the consequences in 5 years.

Overpay is relative, right? If he hit the market today he probably would have gotten this same contract or a bit more from some team. So from a free agency market perspective it is not an overpay. I worry that for our roster though it is an overpay because we are about to make Allen the highest paid player in NFL history (at least I assume/hope) and we are desperate for elite talent. My ultimate opinion on these latest extensions will depend on if they hinder us from adding that elite talent.

Hendrickson had a break out year in 2020 collecting 13.5 sacks in 15 games. Say what you want about Rousseau, this past year was not a break out year. Honestly for me his whole career he has been pretty much the same guy - excellent setting the edge, disrupts more than he finishes, doesn't make enough plays in critical moments in critical games. To me Rousseau is emblematic of the roster as a whole which is to say he is just good enough to not finish the job. I'm glad he got $80M and not $100M like some were projecting. But also I wish we had a couple $100M players. That's why these extensions leave me feeling a bit underwhelmed and a bit worried that they will take away from our ability to add higher tier players.

I always try to take the holistic view. So far this offseason we have extended good not great players at slot WR, LB, and run stopping EDGE. On the face of it that strategy does not scream value. If all of these players continue to be exactly who they have been, collectively it is a big overpay. Of course we need to see what happens on Monday and beyond. I think they should be doing what the Eagles do and effectively kick the can until Allen is 35 and then we can take our medicine for a couple years. If the structure of these latest contracts allows them to do that, I don't have a big problem with them. We still need to add multiple top tier talents. I'm with @Kirby Jackson that the goal should be to add two top 100 players this offseason. If we pull that off my holistic view of the offseason will be that it was a big success.

That only matters for one year deals. If we want to pay someone like Hendrickson or Metcalf, their contract is going to line up with the three contracts we just handed out. So yes extending this caliber of player absolutely makes it more difficult to add a top tier talent when one becomes available.

Allen had just had an MVP level year when we extended him, and he's a QB. White was elite almost from day one. Those are completely different conversations. The players we just gave big extensions to are good not great players at slot WR, LB, and run stopping EDGE. In a vacuum that does not demonstrate good value. The best positive example you can point to is Spencer Brown who was also a good not great player at a less premium position. Beane was right about him, he ascended further and looks like a steal. I think Beane needs to be right about 2 out of 3 of these recent signings. If we're paying them for what they've done then collectively it is a massive overpay.

If the Bills want to make this extension look good they need to add a legit pass rusher across from him. That will go a long way in telling us if Rousseau's mediocre sack production is because of his own deficiencies or because the players around him haven't been good enough to let his talent shine. I think there's a bit too much emphasis being placed on Rousseau's youth and supposed ceiling. He just finished his 4th year. You don't see a lot of players take off in their 5th year and beyond. The conversation reminds me of Tremaine Edmunds, not that I'm saying this contract is anything close to the horrible contract Chicago gave him, it just gives me the same feeling.

Here's my question for you and anyone else who loves this extension - if Rousseau remains exactly the player he has been, do you think he is worth this money? For me the answer is a hard no. I would guess the Bills feel similarly. They are betting that he is going to improve. For all the advanced stats that rank him higher than his production would indicate, he has maxed out at 8 sacks. Even with the exploding salary cap I don't believe 8 sack players are worth $20M AAV.

Hopefully. So far the examples we have are Knox who turned out to be a massive overpay, Oliver who I would say we about broke even on and are still hoping for more, and Brown who looks like a great bargain. So we are 1 for 3 in this sort of move ending up as you say.

Because of the cap space it will take up in 2026 and beyond. This extension I at least understand, unlike Bernard where I was confused about the rush to get it done. Rousseau at his best shuts down his entire side of the field in the run game. If they can get a legit pass rusher across from him he could be a piece in a very good DL. I just don't like that we are now paying a lot of pieces like they're studs. Obviously we need to see what Beane is able to do when FA starts to really judge these moves. Right now I get the sense they are playing it very safe, aggressively maintaining the status quo. I hope they have left themselves enough resources to add at least one top tier talent because that's what we've been missing.

I don't know. It's lower than he could have gotten. But now we're spending a fortune on players that disappear in critical moments. I think they needed to be willing to shake up the roster and instead they're running it back. They have to be right about these extensions. They're betting on several players to be a lot better than they have been. These contracts are going to prevent us from signing established game changers. So these players need to become game changers.

I wonder if our 2026 1st would get it done? They might value next year's draft pick more than this year since it's supposed to be a great QB class.

My thoughts were we could afford to re-sign one of Benford and Rousseau (I lean Benford) and one of Shakir, Cook, Bernard (I leaned Shakir). Extending too many good not great players, especially at non-premium positions, eventually catches up to you. That's my issue with this deal. Every year there is a player or two that we could really use to sign in FA or trade for and we can't afford them because of deals like this.

So we have the necessary draft capital. It just depends on if Cincy is willing to send him to a conference rival.