Billl
-
Posts
2,913 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Billl
-
-
8 minutes ago, Gunsgoodtime said:
I'm not disagreeing with the moves that needed to be made, except Morse. But to think this team is winning a Super Bowl next year loaded with with rookies and new vet minimums is just kind of crazy to me
Morse is an average Center at this point in his career. That’s easily replaceable. I think a lot of Bills fans are going to be surprised by how much faster the team looks week 1 next season simply by virtue of them being younger. Hyde, Poyer, White, Miller, Floyd, Jones You simply can’t have that many players out there who are lacking in athleticism and hope to keep up with elite offenses in the playoffs.
You can teach young players how to be better. You can’t teach old players to be faster.
-
1
-
-
50 minutes ago, Gunsgoodtime said:
Only on TBD can the Bills lose Hyde, Poyer, White, Morse, Neal, Harty, Sherfield, trade Bates, lose Araiza to the Chiefs and sign Hack, Rapp, and Trubisky and be better than they was with no current replacements or money🤣🤣🤣. Btw other teams have draft picks too, and most of them have way more cap space including the Chiefs.
I'm pretty sure everyone except Bills fans see this as quite the set back, but carry on daydreaming
I don’t think the Bills have a worse roster today than they did yesterday. Literally none of the players they cut are difference makers at this point in their careers. Beane let the roster, the defense in particular, get old and slow. I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if the defense isn’t just as good by the end of next season as it was at the end of this past season. There are a lot of ways to succeed in this league, but being old and slow on defense isn’t one of them.
-
1
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:
Is it bad that I would hold it against him that the Fish put up a seventy-something burger on his defense? 🤔
He didn't play that week.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, NewEra said:
So you saying that he’s basically guaranteed to get paid the 18Mish he was originally slated for even if he only plays a handful of games?
I haven't seen how it's written, but the idea that he would isn't silly. It would benefit the Bills without negatively impacting Miller.
-
12 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's not silly, though. The only way Von would agree to this is if he's essentially guaranteed that it won't cost him anything that he was already owed. The bonus money can be kicked to 2025 as long as it involves him reaching a benchmark that he wouldn't have hit in 2023.
It's a bonus for accounting purposes only.
3 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.”
Ed's contract was written under entirely different circumstances. His bonuses are new money that he wasn't already owed. Von's isn't an incentive to perform. If it were, he wouldn't have agreed to the new terms. It's nothing more than a way to push money from 2024 to 2025. People are overthinking this.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Dablitzkrieg said:
That’s a wrap.
-
1 minute ago, Richard Noggin said:
Actually funny at the end there, while also raising a question I don't have the answer to: wtf DOES constitute "likely to be reached" vs "unlikely to be reached" incentives for ANYONE, really, but especially for Von Miller coming off consecutive injury-hampered seasons??
Jokes aside, my explanation was accurate. Performance incentives are categorized as either likely to be earned (LTBE) or not likely to be earned (NLTBE), with the categorization determined by looking at the performance of the player in the prior season. If a player reached a performance threshold in the prior year, the incentive is considered LTBE and counts against the cap. If a player did not reach the performance threshold in the prior year, it is categorized as NLTBE and will not count against the cap. If a LTBE incentive is not reached, the team gets cap credit the following year.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, bills6969 said:
This is some serious cap space maneuvering.
how does incentives work with salary cap? Sounds like Von can earn up to 20m in incentives this year. How does that end up counting against the cap?
If they are considered “likely to be reached” incentives, they count towards the current year. “Unlikely to be reached” incentives count towards the following season if they are reached. Incentives are considered likely to be reached if the player would have earned it the previous season. In Von’s case, an example of “likely to be reached” would be something like putting his shoes on the correct feet or pooping in the potty.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:
Super interesting, but I bet those "hard to reach incentives" were attainable in Von's eyes, which is why he agreed to it.
The way that provision works, it could be as simple as recording 5 combined tackles in 2024. If it’s a number he didn’t reach the previous season, it qualifies. It’s a way to push money to next year without adding additional years.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, BillsFan130 said:
But wouldn't that fall under "void year's " technically though?
As I understand it (and that’s a massive disclaimer), the whole point of void years is that they are real years contractually, but both parties have the right to opt out of them and they’re written such that there is effectively a 100% chance that one of the parties will exercise that option. For example, Rasul is (was) allowed to agree to play for $850,000 a year in 2025 through 2027 as long as both he and the Bills agree to it. There is just nothing that binds either side to adhere to the deal.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, BillsFan130 said:
Ahh ok thanks. I didn't know you could do that with only one year left on the deal
That's the beauty of accounting. Technically, it's not his last year in the deal. He has "4" years left.
-
2
-
-
Cool, so we're back to the idea that players only put a team over the top to win a championship if it's done in year one. (But that only counts if they're signed as free agents. If they're drafted, they can put a team over the top years down the road because reasons. Undrafted free agents are a little murky, so signing Kurt Warner may or may not have directly contributed to the Rams winning a Superbowl. Then there are guys like John Elway, Eli Manning, and Jim Kelly where is really hard to say whether or not they directly helped their teams advance to and/or win Superbowls).
-
8 minutes ago, BillsFan130 said:
Re structure in the last year of his deal?
Would this mean void years added on potentially?
He's already got 3 void years on his contract. They're likely just converting as much of his base salary to a bonus as possible and spreading that amount over 4 years instead of just 2024.
-
21 minutes ago, MikePJ76 said:
Its the whole premise of the thread. A free agent who immediately puts the team over the top.
I am sorry your reading comprehension is poor. I can't help with you that.
your response about Allen is the equivalent of me asking you what 1+1 is and you say purple, then get mad when I point out purple is not a number.
WTF are you talking about? The thread starter literally used Reggie White as an example of someone who meets the definition in the initial post.
-
41 minutes ago, MikePJ76 said:
This post makes zero sense in response to what I posted and to the topic of the thread.
You've said that free agents don't directly lead to Superbowl wins if they don't win the Superbowl the following year. By that logic, draft picks don't directly contribute to Superbowl wins unless they do it their rookie year.
Reggie White had 3 sacks in the Packers Superbowl win over the Patriots, but you say that his signing doesn't count as directly leading to the win because it was his fourth year on the team. Well Josh has been on the Bills for 6 seasons. If the Bills win a Superbowl next year, your own qualifiers would dictate that drafting Josh wouldn't have directly led to the win because it would be his sixth year on the team.
It's a stupid argument to only count their first year with the team, but you're the one making it. Nobody else is.
-
2 hours ago, MikePJ76 said:
yes it absolutely would not.
It would have had he stayed healthy in 22 and the bills won the super bowl. That would be an exact answer to what this thread is about. This thread is about a free agent signing that led directly and impacted directly the team getting over the hump and winning the super bowl. It has almost never happened in one season via free agency. The closest thing is Deion, Demarcus ware, Tom Brady-Gronk.....but even each of those have a number of other additions that helped the team.
basically this thread shows that a free agent signing will not get you over the hump in one year to a championship and that is all. Trades have been more productive and team building takes a lot of time. Free agency is best used to fill holes you have and you get your core players from the draft. Its pretty much always been that way.
So if the Bills win a Superbowl, drafting Josh wouldn't qualify as directly leading to a Superbowl win either, I guess.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, MikePJ76 said:
that was 4 seasons later.
The packers underwent a ton of change in those 4 years before they won the superbowl. They got beat by Dallas in each of those 3 playoff losses in part because their big time free agent signing, Reggie White got manhandled by Dallas right tackle Eric Williams. Williams owned white
So if Buffalo wins Superbowl LVX and Von has 3 sacks in the game, his signing wouldn't qualify as directly leading to a Superbowl win?
-
1 minute ago, SCBills said:
Bills used him as their OL6/Jumbo TE in heavy packages last year.
1 minute ago, BuffaloBillyG said:There wasn't.
He played a handful of snaps for McGovern when he got dinged up here and there and had to come out. Played a few games late in games we had well in hand. Bulk of his snaps came and "6th OL/TE eligible" role. He's very solid at that spot.
That makes sense. I should have realized that given that I watched Buffalo jam it down the Chiefs' throat in the first half of the divisional round using an extra lineman.
-
1
-
-
What's the story with this guy? Just saw that he played offensive snaps in 15 regular season games and both postseason games but never more than 37% of them. Why was there a rotation at Guard? I've never heard of that.
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, MikePJ76 said:
Reggie White got his azz whipped as a packer playing vs Dallas in the playoffs. He lost to Dallas in the playoffs in 93, 94 and 95. He was not the difference maker.
GB won the nfc in 96 because SF and Dallas were beat up and run down from years of deep playoff runs and veteran players getting old.
Reggie White had 3 sacks in their Superbowl win. I'd say that qualifies.
-
1
-
-
Mitchell Schwartz, Tyranny Matthieu, and Sammy Watkins all played huge roles for the Chiefs' 2019 win.
-
4 hours ago, DieHardBillsFan said:
That trade value is terrible. Only thing that makes sense is he is a cap casualty.
What do you think the going rate is for backup centers? I think they did well to get anything more than a seventh rounder for him.
-
13 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:
The biggest factor in his trade value is that this is the best OL draft in decades. If it were a bad draft, given the state of current OL play in the NFL then perhaps he does warrant better value than Brown(who was arriving with big contract demands, limited work at LT in a heavy run offense and wasn't/isn't as good of a pass blocker, the more important skill).
But this season there are going to be guys late in round 1 who teams think will be as good or better than Dawkins in pretty short order.......and they can be had cheap and potentially for a long time. Not a sellers market for OL.
That's true as well. That said, this OT class is very similar to the one when Brown was traded in that there were a few studs at the very top and then a ton of guys who were better fits at RT than LT. Time being a flat circle and all, Kansas City is once again trying to solve for a LT, and there doesn't seem to be a great option that will be sitting there at the end of the first round.
-
Seems reasonable to me. I thought Nabors going ahead of Harrison was interesting, though.
-
3
-
Chiefs-Dolphins Game - Frostbite
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
If I still had a middle finger, I’d flip you the bird.