transplantbillsfan
-
Posts
10,436 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by transplantbillsfan
-
-
9 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:
Comp pick 🎉🎊🪅
Not that anyone knows anymore, but is this contract big enough to count positively for Buffalo in the Comp Pick formula?
-
Been thinking about this myself. My heart wants Beane to do it. My head does not.
I can see Beane meeting it halfway and just doing $11 or $12m, but I think he does it all in the end. Restructuring Allen this offseason and extending Taron and Dion would free up enough CAP space to make 1 or 2 relative splash signings along with a few other lower level signings and still be net positive in our CAP next year.
-
1 hour ago, GASabresIUFan said:
Depends on the contract.
That's how Buffalo does their contracts
-
This is irritating. Last year when Edmunds was walking there were so many people in terms of podcasters and posters on here saying we'd get a 3rd because it's a formula.
So to those of you who said it would be a 3rd, what happened?
-
1
-
-
Joe Marino and Greg Tompsett and their ilk basically guaranteed he'd be back because he was an Exclusive Rights Free Agent, which means if the Bills wanted him, they could have him at the minimum and he couldn't go anywhere else.
I think Joe Marino in his last "what I would do" podcast for the offseason said it's a contract worth $985k
-
4
-
-
4 hours ago, Shaw66 said:
As others have pointed out, the incentive may have been that the Bills told him they would cut him, and his agent told him that his options in free agency would be limited, given the uncertainty about his recovery.
I haven't read everyone's comments, but if the Bills cut him their Dead Cap would have been astronomical. I know there are posters who claim it would have been doable, but if what you're saying really happened, I think it would have been a bluff and a bad game of chicken Von and his agent fell for and lost.
I don't think that's what happened, though.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, FireChans said:
If this is "mostly right," I'm Miles Davis.
Your Wife must be proud
-
1 hour ago, BBFL said:
Not as much as Legette and Franklin, hence why I didn’t say above… But they were both more productive than Pearsall and Wilson…Wilson played better competition but he wasn’t exactly dominating or the teams he faced. Alabama was his best game. Baker had a great season. Again, I have no problem them being in the same tier but a whole classification below is wildly absurd imo.
I don't watch College Football AT ALL!!! But my understanding is that Michigan didn't pass the ball all that much.
Most scouts have JJ McCarthy above Bo Nix or Michael Penix even though McCarthy has significantly less production.
Also... remember Josh Allen...
-
9 minutes ago, BBFL said:
No, I didn’t claim myself an expert but I’ve watched a lot of UofSC and Oregon games. Im fine with them being below the tiers 1 and 2 but I’d have him on par with at least Pearsall and Wilson at best. More so Legette as he didn’t bomb at the combine if that’s the basis and the guy was really the only option Rattler had. Productive against Florida and Georgia to boot even with double coverage…Have you watched a lot of Pearsall and Wilson?
-
1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:
We’ve gotten so used to these o rely inflated numbers but am I right in reading that his new incentive deal equates to more or less $1,000,000 per sack? I mean, really?
People need to understand that Von needed to have some motive to agree to this. This incentive allows him to earn more than his previous contract and also gives the Bills a whole lot of CAP savings this year. If he gets all those sacks, we're on the hook next year and, frankly, Von is likely still on the team.
-
9 minutes ago, BBFL said:
Polk, Legette & Franklin a whole tier below Pearsall, Wilson and Baker….?!? 🤡I know Franklin didn’t have a great combine but the tape doesn’t lie, there’s no way he’s a whole classification below those 3. Same with Legette.
No way... huh???? Have you scouted all these players thoroughly and do you have a scouting background?
I agree it was eye opening that he put Pearsall, Wilson and Baker ahead of a bunch of guys everyone's talking about in the late first round, but it's quite possible we're the ones who are wrong.
-
I listened to Bruce Nolan's podcast and he has his WR rankings. For those who don't know, he's been a writer and podcaster for Buffalo Rumblings for years and he knows his stuff. Very knowledgeable in scouting.
He actually ranked his top 17 WRs in the draft and broke them into 5 tiers:
Tier 1
Marvin Harrison Jr.
Malik Nabers
Rome Odunze
Tier 2
Brian Thomas Jr.
Adonai Mitchell
Ladd McConkey
Tier 3
Ricky Pearsall
Javon Baker
Roman Wilson
Tier 4
Xavier Legette
Xavier Worthy
Ja'Lynn Polk
Brendan Rice
Troy Franklin
Tier 5
Malachi Corley
Jalen McMillen
Keon Coleman
-
1
-
-
If we sign him, he wouldn't count against the compensatory pick formula since he was released.
-
53 minutes ago, FireChans said:
@transplantbillsfan is going to be shocked to know that Von Miller isn’t going to get ~$10M for 4 tackles.
No, I never said that was the contract. What I said was that Von wouldn't have signed the contract if there weren't something like some NLTBE incentives in there. The player and team would have to agree on what those incentives would be.
Looks like I was right about that and (mostly) right about how those incentives work. Obviously Von didn't get a sack last year and his incentives start at 2 sacks. I wonder if there's a $500k incentive for 1 sack of if there's a clause in the incentive verbiage that because of his natural position as an edge rusher, there's a baseline of expectation on the position based on the agreed upon metric. Like 1 sack for an edge rusher if sacks are the agreed upon metric. But if it were tackles and Von didn't have any tackles last year it would have been 1 tackle so he would need at least 2. Or for a WR if they 1 reception would probably be what the WR would want over 1 TD, etc.
That's just my guess. But you can go look yourself. NLTBE incentives are based on prior year's performance.
And I think everyone would want him to earn all of his money back.
-
11 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:
That's the difference between likely to be earned and not likely to be earned. It's not what they are "typically based on."
There are PLENTY of not likely to be earned bonuses set a lot higher than what the player did last year.
So a likely to be earned incentive on tackles for Von would have to be at 3 tackles or less. But a not likely to be earned incentive could be set at four. Or at 50.
There's a famous story about Brady keeping Gronk in the last game of the year to earn his incentives. Those incentives were set at 55 receptions and 750 yards. But the year before he'd put up 45 catches and 623 yards.
You can set not-likelies as high as you want.
Look, I'm no CAP expert, but I'm quite sure I have this right.
Not likely to be earned incentives AND likely to be earned incentives are based strictly on the prior year's performance.
But it's not like those are the only bonuses players get during the season. The one you reference with Gronk was likely Performance based pay. And you're right, performance based pay can absolutely be set at whatever level team and player agree upon.
My point was that we don't actually know what the incentives were, but I would bet that in order for Miller to agree to this, there were some Not likely to be earned incentives built in that he's very obviously going to earn considering the season he had last year. I listed the 3 very obvious ones of tackles, sacks and games played.
6 hours ago, Mango said:
Greg gets some things right. But he gets a lot wrong especially regarding the cap. Cover 1 started as great. They’re less great now. Just my opinion on them.
I think the reason a player is willing to take an incentive laden deal in this situation is because if they don’t his career likely ends. Unless Von has 15+ sacks this year his time here is done at season end. And maybe his career overall is done. You can’t keep a guy who vastly underperforms his cost. And nobody wants to sign a guy who underperforms.
But take a haircut with the possibility to win it back based on performance? If Von gets 8.5 sacks this year at $8M people are having the conversation “He just needed a year to get right” and even if he doesn’t stick around here he is a guy who performed at a level commensurate with his pay. Good credit and bad credit matter.
What does Greg get wrong regarding the CAP? I listen to him a lot. I also just cross referenced the whole conversation of "likely to be earned" and "not likely to be earned" incentives being based on the prior year and sure seems like he's right.
It's just that maybe people are misunderstanding what I'm saying and are thinking those are the only 2 possible incentives that Von could have renegotiated for, and as I just said, they aren't.
5 hours ago, FireChans said:Yes, NLTBE incentives are based on the players statistics, but they are not just “1 better than last year.” There’s no evidence for that.
Our own Ed Oliver has incentives for 6 and 8 sacks in a season in his new contract. Coming off last year where he had 2.5 sacks.
So I really am not sure where you are getting the idea that Von’s incentives will be “1 more tackle or sack than he had this year.”
As I just said, those are Performance based incentives. That's different from NLTBE/LTBE.
-
Poyer replacement. Knows the system and played much better to end the year.
Now get Hyde's replacement
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Mango said:
Am I missing something? You think Von will get a bonus for 4 tackles?Bonuses are generally based on a total performance not necessarily related to the prior year. I would be shocked if Von triggered additional pay on his 4th tackle. That silly.
It wouldn't be a bonus. It's a not likely to be earned incentive, which are typically based on the player's previous statistical season. I listen to a LOT of Greg Tompsett. That's exactly how he defines it.
You can Google it and that's how it's defined, too.
I'm sure that player and team can come to a different agreement, but what would be the motivation for the player? The entire point is that it benefits both player and team, as this does. That's how you so often hear of players agreeing to something we equate to a "payout." They can earn it back. And if they do, the team owes it the following year.
Tompsett also points out that it can work in favor of the team when a player agrees to LIKELY to be earned incentives, but doesn't reach them. For example, Matt Milano signed an extension last offseason. We don't know the details of the incentives in his contract, but assuming the team put incentives in his contract that were likely to be earned incentives in his contract like tackles, sacks, interceptions, and games played... he likely didn't meet those incentives. Those likely to be earned incentives would have counted against the CAP last year and therefore we'd get that money back in the CAP this year.
1 hour ago, HappyDays said:Maybe. But part of me wonders if Beane threatened him - take the pay cut or we'll release you as a post-6/1 designation. A couple months back I thought that would be one way of handling his contract, I just didn't know if Beane would be willing to be that ruthless. If Von was cut he would get a paltry contract offer from another team, and we would be stuck with a bunch of dead money, so it is a good compromise for both sides to accept this pay cut.
If the report is that Von can still earn $20m next year, I doubt it's Beane being ruthless and would bet on the not likely to be earned incentives.
-
6 hours ago, TheBrownBear said:
The magic number for those incentives is 10. Not 10 sacks, but a combination of 10 tackles or QB pressures.
I don't doubt that, but you hearing this from anywhere in particular????
10 tackles won't be difficult for him to reach, anyway.
-
6 hours ago, ColoradoBills said:
The contract is going to be re-wrote for these incentives.
I'm POSITIVE it won't be the standard LTBE/NLTBE incentives.
6 hours ago, FireChans said:Hm, do you have a link?
there’s certainly a LTBE and NLTBE, but I thought the teams are allowed to set whatever they want as the actual numbers.
Not likely to be earned incentives are typically based on the player's previous statistical season. I listen to a LOT of Greg Tompsett. That's exactly how he defines it.
You can Google it and that's how it's defined, too.
I'm sure that player and team can come to a different agreement, but what would be the motivation for the player? The entire point is that it benefits both player and team, as this does.
Tompsett also points out that it can work in favor of the team when a player agrees to LIKELY to be earned incentives, but doesn't reach them. For example, Matt Milano signed an extension last offseason. We don't know the details of the incentives in his contract, but assuming the team put incentives in his contract that were likely to be earned incentives in his contract like tackles, sacks, interceptions, and games played... he likely didn't meet those incentives. Those likely to be earned incentives would have counted against the CAP last year and therefore we'd get that money back in the CAP this year.
-
6 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:
Come on, the incentive won't be on last year's production.
Yes, that's how it works.
-
8 minutes ago, Dillenger4 said:
OMG!! Amazing!! It is a reneg - re negotiate contact full confirmed. That is awesome. His $ is gone forever and it is now incentive ladden. Win-Win for us.
And Tre gone makes my year!!!!!!!! Wimpiest Bill ever
I think he legitimately thinks he can still play and this new deal gives him the opportunity to earn more than what he was scheduled to earn.
You can almost guarantee that 2 of the "hard to reach incentives" put in his contract are tackles and sacks.
That means if he gets more tackles than 2023, he reaches that incentive and earns more.
That wouldn't be hard considering he had 3 tackles
If he gets more sacks than in 2023, he reaches that incentive and earns more.
That wouldn't be hard considering he had 0 sacks.
My bet is another incentive will be games played or active, and considering he started the season on PUP, that might not be hard for him, either.
So yes, this is a solid for Buffalo, but he may legitimately believe he's about to earn more than he was scheduled... and all of that money goes on next year's CAP.
-
2
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, FireChans said:
Thank god. He knew he was cooked if he didn’t take less.
I know folks say cutting him was impossible, but players don’t take pay cuts unless they are on the block.
Actually I think he legitimately thinks he can still play and this new deal gives him the opportunity to earn more than what he was scheduled to earn.
Think about it folks... you can almost guarantee that 2 of the "hard to reach incentives" put in his contract are tackles and sacks.
That means if he gets more tackles than 2023, he reaches that incentive and earns more.
That wouldn't be hard considering he had 3 tackles
If he gets more sacks than in 2023, he reaches that incentive and earns more.
That wouldn't be hard considering he had 0 sacks.
My bet is another incentive will be games played or active, and considering he started the season on PUP, that might not be hard for him, either.
So yes, this is a solid for Buffalo, but he may legitimately believe he's about to earn more than he was scheduled... and all of that money goes on next year's CAP.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:
If that is as reported it is a proper pay cut.
What I mean by that is it isn't a restructure and it isn't swapping non-guaranteed money for a smaller amount of guaranteed money.
Von's $17.5m salary this year was FULLY guaranteed. He is taking a near $9m pay cut (who knows what the incentives are). That is significant.
Super interesting, but I bet those "hard to reach incentives" were attainable in Von's eyes, which is why he agreed to it.
-
3
-
1
-
-
LAMP
in Off the Wall
32 minutes ago, Buffalo Boy said:The night they lost I said the Chiefs were winning it all.
The next day I was one who said it was a rebuild and McD needed to go also.
Right, right and right!!!This coach absolutely squandered our best chance in decades , multiple seasons in a row.
Now , here we are getting ready to rinse and repeat.
Never fear, at the beginning of the new season , I’ll pour some more salt in the would and point out that we will never win it all with McD.
Peace out till then, Boys and Girls✌️
Dude...
what the heck are you talking about????? So because we released a CB who hasn't been healthy or Elite for 3 years, a Safety who is clearly on the decline, a Special Teams Ace who is clearly on the decline, a WR/PR who never remotely lived up to his expectations or contract, a RB/PR who... same thing, and our starting Center who was still good, but old... our window is closed????
I think if anything this might show that Beane and McDermott are looking at this team and trying to ignite new life in it THIS year!!!
Those 11 draft picks we have sure will help.
Super Bowl!!!!
Say the Bills DON’T restructure Josh Allen…
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Guys... none of the restructures even need to be announced until Wednesday at 4 PM EST. It may have already happened. In fact, I'd say it very likely already happened.