Einstein's Dog

Who? What other Bills player put out a ridiculous amount they wanted to get paid? I didn't hear about it but I don't have active accounts of all players. Seems like all the other Bills players quietly got deals done.

What other Bills player put out anything similar? And lets not forget his brother's nonsense, or putting the house up for sale. Cook's been quiet now, maybe because they let him look into trade/pay partners and found it to be limited. Cook has been an exciting 2 down back, in the top tier of those. Close to D Henry ($8M) level. Shakir is also an exciting WR. But he is a slot WR so he got paid at the slot level, not at the DK Metcalf level. Cook is a 2 down back that appears to want to be paid like a 3 down workhorse back. I don't think the Bills plan on using him like that, or paying him like that. For me, there's no love lost on the business side of this now. Play Cook at his bargain $5M (and if he doesn't show - fine him). Then next year you have the decision of whether or not to franchise tag him. They wanted hardball, they got it. Beane can do this while saying the whole time "How he loves J Cook and J Cook means everything to this team".

Sometimes it's the way people go about things. I don't begrudge Cook for trying to get paid, but I don't need to hear about it. What good did going on social media do him? For the most part, it just made Cook look overly greedy - a ridiculous amount of an ask ($15M). How did they expect the Bills fanbase to react? No, I don't want Beane to give in to what look like the petulant demands of a greedy team (Cook/brother/agent). The other 4-5 draft players were able to quietly get decent deals done. And $8-$10M isn't chump change - if they weren't idiots that amount could set them up for life. It seems like a good sign that the Bills FO didn't draft an RB, meaning they expect Cook to play. Seems we'll need to take it year by year with Cook.

The reason you quibble is because there is a salary cap. If you overpay for an RB there will be less funds for other positions. I would have rather the cap allocation went to DK Metcalf instead of an RB. Secondly, from a longer term perspective it's a bad look for the FO to be perceived to have given in to the demands of a squeaky wheel (see Dallas Cowboys). The way the FO negotiates has brought excellent deals with most of the good drafted players, making an exception will make future negotiations more difficult. Third, many people here are not placing the value of Cook for what he has done, but rather for what he could be. Cook's stats are at best, at the level of D Henry, $8M a year. Upstream people are saying he should be in the tier of Jacobs, Kamara, or A Jones - yet Cook has never put up those kind of numbers.

What? Where are you getting your incorrect figures from? Ty makes about $2.5/yr and Cook will get $5M this year.

I've seen you allude to this twice now and IMO it may set a bad precedent for Beane. The excellent deals Beane has been able to negotiate with the draft picks are dependent upon them offering a big pile of guaranteed money for contracting future years at their current market rates. You don't give a raise for a year and see how it turns out. Using Benford as an example, you give him two options - play out his current contract and then get big money as a FA if he doesn't get injured, or get a haul of guaranteed money now at your market rate. No middle roading it. Take it or leave it. Most players want guaranteed money now. So for Cook a similar negotiation was probably offered (and vehemently rejected from what we can tell). Following the protocol from above the FO would have offered Cook big guaranteed money to contract for future years at his current market value. I would guess his current market value would be around D Henry $8-9/yr for the future years. You can then see how Cook's team, that has the emotional IQ of a teenage school girl, would go to social media demanding $15M. You do not placate that by giving a one year exception.

I think you are right and there was drama. And it wasn't just the fanbase making it up. These guys know social media posts will garner attention. They know someone will notice if they put their house up for sale (even if it means they have to backdoor it by bringing it to someone's attention). But as I said above, I think the situation has cooled. It looks like Beane thinks J Cook will play this year. Hope he has that calculated correctly.

I think the drama has been dramatically reduced. The Bills did not trade him. The Bills didn't even draft another RB. To me that means Beane clearly expects J Cook to play. If Beane thought Cook was going to sit for the first 11 games I think Beane would have taken a different approach. Glad to see it didn't happen, we can't just replace Cook he is an exciting top tier RB. And to go one step further, depending on results this year (Superbowl + running offense) I think it's possible Beane puts in a big offer to retain Cook. Hasn't been his philosophy to date but things can change.

If they have changed plans now for whatever reason (no Aaron) and have embraced a tank, maybe our FO could float a 1st + something for DK (yes, I still regret not getting that guy).

If we're coming clean, I'm not really Einstein's Dog.

I think the non-drafting of an RB is a good sign. If Cook (agent/team) had told Beane trade him or Cook will hold out to week 11, then I think the Bills would have been looking at drafting an RB. And it wouldn't have been just the other teams calling, it would have also been the Bills on the phone to move Cook. Cook is an excellent, exciting RB that is a bargain at $5M. Great sign that he is going to be here playing on a contract year.

Maybe Pickens for J Cook? Trade problems on their contract years.

Wow, on Cook's side, that's different from me. I'm firmly in the trade Cook now camp. It was Cook that put out the ridiculous $15M. It has been Cook (meaning Cook's team - his bitter brother and newbie agent) doing the social media escapades - $15M, scrubbing account, putting house on sale, etc. Now doing a modification to Cook's contract to include incentives lessens Beane future negotiating. It also would make the players who Beane did previous deals with question if they did the right thing. Giving the squeaky media hound a break starts turning the Bills into Dallas North. The Bills just paid a big price with removing Diggs, stay the course and flush out Cook for the future of the team. The Bills have a bright future. Yes, you lose a talented top 10 RB by trading Cook. But you also cut loose a distraction early (before a Diggs level problem). You lessen a risk - Cook doing a "hold-in" for over half the season. You get something for 2025 by doing it now, and you get to replenish the RB room with another RB. And it would be exciting to get another 2nd round draft pick.

Round 2 is a good place to move J Cook (maybe to Dallas). Get a decent pick to use on some of the upper players. - like Scourton + Collins and/or a S. And then figure out moving up in the 3rd for an RB.

Getting close to a Cook trade to move up for a 1st round rated CB.

Along with Barron

Hope the Cowboys don't do anything stupid like take an RB (Hampton).

Bowers

Was hoping Jeanty would go in the top 10. Helps move the value of Cook up for a trade.

Mike Florio's draft had the Bills taking Luther Burden - that was different. It was right after D Harmon then S Revel went (Grant had gone earlier) Didn't see J Barron on his list.

Yeah, kind of backwards here, usually you trade up to get your particular target - which I could understand if J Barron was here. If you have several in the same tier that allows you to wait. With Amos, Grant, Harmon and Hairston still on the board I don't think a move up is needed, especially when it usually costs around a 4th to do it.

Could be. Would be nice if Jeanty goes in the top 10. Cook and a 6th for the Cowboys 2nd. Cowboys could get a top WR at 12, Cook with their 2nd - that should help Jerry with headlines and offensive potential.

It's unfortunately too late to be able to reallocate the Cook budget into the WR room at this point. It's upsetting to think that had they known of Cook's demands the FO may have chosen the DK Metcalf route instead of the Palmer+Cook plan. My prediction is they are moving Cook during the draft. While missing the voluntary workouts doesn't move the needle, the needle has already been pushed into "get rid of" territory. Cook already doesn't like the proposed extension, will not like the proposed usage (same as 2024), and has already started acting out. To me, the signs are all there that moving him now is the best course of action - get rid of the malcontent and distraction, get rid of the risk of someone holding out half the year, reload with a young, eager rookie. Better to move on a year early than a year late. They didn't tolerate this from Diggs, no need to put up with it from Cook. Makes the draft more interesting to me.

On the flip side, if there are 12 players with a round 1 grade and one of them slides into the early 20s (J Barron), it may be very tempting to see what it takes to get him (Cook and a pick for instance).

Counter points: *Missing voluntary OTAs is just another step in the Diggs playbook. It's not unexpected for someone unhappy. You don't know how seriously McBeane is taking this, and part of the business side of the NFL is trading players (once again similar to what he did with Diggs). The players would understand. *Cook may be traded, certainly a possibility (you're claiming otherwise comes off as a little ridiculous). The physical exam is a mere formality. There are actually very few RBs in this draft better than Cook. And a team getting Cook does not have to pay him a huge contract yet, the trade can be for the $5M bargain price. *Cook may have a great year ahead with the Bills, or Cook may have a year similar to 2024 - the same RB room from 2024 is back, and the Bills may want to watch Cooks workload to have him ready for the playoffs. And the scary kicker is Cook may just want to be paid based on the 2024 stats and sit out a good portion of 2025. *While the Bills may want Cook to have a great season, the priority for the Bills is for the team to have a great season. And as mentioned above that may mean work load management on the RBs. *Drafting an RB this week would make the most sense if Cook is traded. There would be RB room, the drafted RB would now be the R Davis insurance, and the RB room would be bargain basement prices - in line with the past philosophy of not paying RBs.