jahnyc

Some thoughts below: 1. The draft. Bills will take a linebacker, and I think it will be either the Poz or Beason. Marv loved Shane Conlan (and that particular pick) and believes that PSU produces great linebackers. Marv may not be sentimental, but he values the lessons of history. The Poz is a strong leader and has intangibles. I think the linebacker position is the biggest hole on the roster going into the draft. I also have a feeling that the Bills will end up with Leonard (Rutgers) at fullback. 2. Our record this year (and next year). It may not be great this year, the schedule looks kind of tough to me. You never know whether teams will be as good as projected, but I would not be surprised with another 7 and 9 season. Too many young players that will need to start and play well (including draft picks in this year's draft). The good news is that if we have a strong draft this year, I think the Bills will be well positioned for a strong year in 2008. I understand that none of our projected starters will be free agents after 2007. Since we have overhauled the roster, there is not much more to do in terms of overpaid veterans or underperforming players (or players with bad attitudes). The Bills are young and will be exciting, and I think 2008 could be a great year if JP continues to develop. 3. Trades/Players released. I can't really disagree with any of Marv's moves on an individual basis. McGahee wanted a new deal and would have left and Spikes may not return to form. The problem is all of the moves being done at the same time. There are many holes and only some will able to be addressed in the draft. This may lead to problems this year, but there should be dividends next year since our young players will continue to get valuable playing experience.

Since when did Clements have character issues? I can see trading Spikes or not re-signing Fletcher this year, but both? Ellison may have potential, but he is unproven. Crowell in the middle? Not sure, particularly after coming off a broken leg that ended his season last year. Who is the third starting lb, and where is the depth? Just because rookies get playing time does not mean that they will develop into quality players.

The Bills have traded or allowed to exit via free agency the following players: Clements, Fletcher, McGahee, Spikes and Holcomb. I understand that some of these players were free agents, but if you add up the 2006 compensation for these players and compare it to the 2007 compensation (assuming the bonuses are amortized, which they are not) of the three players brought it in (and Kelsay), it is close to a wash. We had a lot of cap room to find replacements, but the problem is cash to cap. The Bills are counting a significant chunk of the the bonus money to be paid to the free agents signed or re-signed this year in the 2007 cap. As a result, we have the worst of both worlds, you allow some quality players to depart, and the free agents that the Bills sign count an inordinate amount against the cap for the 2007 season, which does not allow the the Bills the ability to sign players to replace the departing players. It is a system that penalizes the Bills for signing free agents. Another effect of cash to cap is that the Bills will be very far under next year's cap as well. While I see the rationale behind some of these moves, a team cannot improve if they do not find replacements for the quality players that leave. The draft will offer the opportunity to develop depth and hopefully at least one starter, but it will be very difficult to replicate last year's draft.

Figured out how to edit and fixed my original message.

My thoughts in the last paragraph. Is there a way to fix the original message in a thread? I don't think he said anything about Nate.

Sorry, cannot do a linky, but Czarnecki of FoxSports points out how some NFL teams are wondering how the Bills could go out and sign Dockery and Walker to deals in excess of $70 million while complaining about small market status and the need for big market teams to share their profits. I had a feeling that this would happen. For what it is worth, Czarnecki also notes that many NFL teams would have only paid Walker the veteran minimum base salary (and certainly not the $10 million in guarantees that the Bills gave him). My thoughts (not those of Czarnecki): I like the Dockery signing and the strategy the Bills used to get him. Steinbach is very good, but not a power run blocker. Plus, he seemed interested in Cleveland. Dielman wanted to stay in San Diego and Davis is overrated (and now overpaid). The Bills targeted the best run blocking guard that was available and a possibility for the Bills.

I have a feeling we are done in free agency, but who knows. The guaranteed money given Kelsay, Dockery and Walker should have exhausted amounts available this year under the cash to cap restrictions. Interesting that there has been nothing on planned visits for June (at least from what I have seen).

Yes, it seemed clear that the Bills were not going to bring Fletcher back, particularly with some of the comments from Marv and others. I assume there is a plan, and if not through free agency, the Bills will address in the draft. They must believe that there are LBs in the draft that can contribute immediately. Our defense is going to be very young.

Are the Bills done with free agency? If so, big needs remain for the draft: 1. LB--even if Crowell moves inside, need a to find a starting LB in the draft. I would guess that the Bills draft at least two LBs in the draft. 2. FB--do we have one on the roster? I guess they could use one of the TEs as an h-back, but does Fairchild's offense require a true FB? 3. CB--still need a cb, maybe a starting cb. Draft in the first or second round? 4. RB--if McGahee is gone, may need to use the first pick on Lynch. 5. DT--I thought Okoye was going to be our pick, but not now since we may need to find starters for LB, CB and RB. The Fletcher deal seemed fairly reasonable. Maybe should have re-signed Fletcher and not signed Walker? Thoughts?

According to the Bills' website (sorry no linky). He is a RT. I feel much better now. The Raiders had a superb offensive line last year.

1. Way too much turmoil with this team (two years in a row). Owner saying the team will eventually need to leave, cash to cap, TKO and McGahee. We need stability if we want to attract free agents and fans. 2. The TKO thing makes some sense because his production does not match his compensation. Having said that, assuming the Bills lose Fletcher, our linebacking corp, once a strength, will be decimated. The Bills will not be able to trade TKO. 3. All the talk from the Bills about wanting to sign their own players is very annoying since they are about to lose Clements and Fletcher. There are no players at those positions in free agency or in the draft who would play as well or better for the Bills next year. In addition, Clements and Fletcher seem to fit the type of player that the Bills want. Clements has been very professional and Fletcher is a strong leader with character. I thought that these were the types of qualities the Bills were looking for in their players. 4. I don't really care, but why did the Bills sign Whittle? I thought Marv was looking for quality and not quantity. Does he count towards the four or so players that will be signed in free agency? I would have thought Butler, Merz, Preston and Pennington would have been enough depth, assuming the Bills really target the o-line in free agency. I hope that the o-line finally will be addressed. It will be very disappointing if all of the holes that have been created recently cause the team to devote resouces to other than improving the o-line. 5. It will be very upsetting to watch teams like San Fran and Cleveland use their cap space while the Bills sit on the sidelines. With the second or third most available cap space, it is crazy not to use it on free agents or on their own players (extensions, etc.).

I do as well.

Whether or not the debt gets syndicated, the debt service (and rates) will remain the same. If the Bills are not particularly profitable now, they will not be able to meet any new significant debt obligations.

Sorry, can't do a link, but Peter King thinks some team will pay Fletcher $6 million per year. He adds that his "upset special for a no-name guy who will get the richest: Buffalo defensive end Chris Kelsay." I don't even want to think about the kind of dollars that Clements will be getting. With crazy amounts to be spent in free agency this year, what a terrible lack of planning not to have re-signed Clements a long time ago and to announce a cash to cap strategy for this year.

I can understand why the Bills would entertain a trade for WM. He has underperformed (reaons not entirely clear) and he wants a new contract with significant money. The problem is that he is coming off of a mediocre season, he will be a free agent after the season, and now our interest in possibly trading WM is public. In other words, our bargaining position is not particularly strong and I doubt that the Bills will get good value for WM. The bigger problem: another big hole to fill with limited options and significant financial constraints. Moreover, free agency does not seem to be a viable option and it is a weak year for RBs in the draft. I like Marv, but I am beginning to feel like the Bills are chasing their tail. I have doubts that a rookie RB will be an improvement over WM. Same with CB (if it is a rookie or Youboty) and middle linebacker (if it is a rookie or Crowell). I know that free agency is always a possibility, but with our self-imposed financial constraints and the lack of quality players available at CB or inside LB, I don't see Bills successfully filling their holes with players that will equal or exceed the play of the players that they will be losing. I am also concerned that Jauron seems genuinely concerned about losing Clements. The Bills cannot always be in the position of building for the future. Some poor planning and decisions (not extending Clements a couple of years ago (instead extending McGee), drafting McGahee, letting Pat Williams leave) have resulted in the Bills current state of mediocrity. If the Bills really want to stop this cycle, they need to step up and hold on to their key players. Re-signing Clements would be a start.

I think that if McGahee plays out his contract and becomes a free agent, it is likely he will leave. Look at Fletcher, who is a strong character type of player, and his anger at the Bills for forcing him to play out his contract. McGahee seems to have, at best, mixed feelings about playing in Buffalo and for the Buffalo Bills. If McGahee becomes a free agent, he will go to the highest bidder. It will not be the Bills.

After watching the "presser" on the Bills website, I would note the following (trying not to repeat the many posts already on the subject): 1. Marv made a good point about the o-line: some big plays, but no consistency. The Bills had trouble running the ball all year, particularly in short yardage situations. Based on what he said, I have the feeling from Marv that the Bills will try to upgrade the o-line in free agency rather than the draft. They want an immediate contribution. He said few rookies can come in and play on the o-line and that the staff likes Butler, Merz and Pennington. 2. If the Bills will be spending $30 million this offseason, I doubt any will be allocated to a new contract for McGahee. They are going to make him play out the final year of his contract. I also doubt the Bills will extend any other players this offseason. 3. Many questions regarding cash to cap. If they cut Spikes, Holcomb and others, will cap savings be added to amounts available for use? If the Bills sign a free agent and pay guaranteed roster bonuses in 2007 and 2008, will they count both bonuses or only the 2007 bonus for purposes of this year's available amount? 4. If the Bills adhere to this cash to cap concept, they will be so far under the cap in coming years, it will be ridiculous. Assuming the cap goes up about $5 million per year and no bonuses to be paid get allocated to future years, you can imagine that our cap space in the future will dwarf our $30 million plus available this year. 5. The $30 million that is available for use will go fast. The Bills have many free agents and many holes to fill. Free agents will receive record deals this year because of the amount of cap space available league wide. This will further reduce our ability to sign quality free agents, because even average players will be getting above average deals.

As I said, we need to see how this plays out (and is implemented). Joesz's email suggests that the Bills really have $50 million to spend, but none of the press coverage seems to support this view. As to staying out of "cap hell," the Bills are more than $30 million under the cap this year. Even if they paid significant bonuses this offseason and such bonuses were amortized, it would not necessarily mean that they will have cap problems in the future. If the Bills implement cash to cap, then some or all bonus amounts will count towards this year's cap. That means little (if any) of bonus amounts paid will amortized. If the cap goes up next year and there are no amortized bonus amounts counting from the prior year, then the team will be significantly under the cap (again). I am not a cap expert, but I expect that the Bills will use roster bonuses and LTBE incentives to ensure that such amounts count for the current year.

We will see how this plays out, but I suppose the Bills could pay a free agent player a guaranteed base for 2007 instead of a bonus (or structure it in a way that the bonus counts for 2007). This would allow them to count the full amount for 2007 and likely exceed the minimum salary cap number without much difficulty. If the Bills pay a bonus in any particular year, are those amounts required to be amortized over the life of the contract or is it optional?

I usually try to be optimistic, but I think this cash to cap stuff stinks. Plus, since it is being implemented this year without giving effect to prior years, we will be subject to double counting. I appreciate that RW is fighting to keep small market teams competitive, but in the near term, this fighting is going to negatively impact our ability to compete. No way RW is going to spend a lot of money while revenue sharing has yet to be resolved. The funny thing is that I don't think most Bills fans want the Bills to spend wildly. I know that I would like to see the Bills re-sign Clements and Kelsay and then get a guard in free agency. That would make me very happy (but it is not going to happen).

Your reasoning is correct. Unfortunately, my sense is that this cash to cap concept is being implemented for this year without giving effect to prior years. The Bills will end up significantly under this year's cap (and in future years as well) if ithey implement and adhere to cash to cap spending.

I think the intended audience of the "presser" was the nfl hierarchy and big revenue teams. The message is clear: the lack of agreement on revenue sharing among the nfl teams has put the Bills in the position of being unable to compete with regard to signing bonuses to retain players or to sign free agents. The press has picked up on the cash to cap concept and it is highlighted on the Buffalo Bills website. This is no accident. .

Harper (cb) from the Indy Colts.

Nate needs to be re-signed. As Bill from NYC noted, we cannot continue to be the dog chasing its tail (which we would be if Clements leaves and we draft another cb in the first round of the draft). The Bills were a little better than anticipated last year, and there is some hope for next season and the forseeable future. But to continue to improve, the team needs to stop being in the position of having to fill major holes each offseason and instead focus on upgrading the roster and developing depth. If the Bills lose Clements, Fletcher, and Kelsay, there is little chance that between free agency and the draft that the Bills will be able to find replacements or upgrade cb, middle lb, guards, te, right tackle, dt, fb, and wr (a true number 2). A couple of other points: 1. If the Bills don't re-sign Clements, it does not guarantee that they will use the money elsewhere (i.e., guard). 2. An average to above average free agent cb will cost at least $5 million per year. 3. A cb drafted with the number 12 pick in the draft will end up costing the Bills a lot of money in terms of bonus and base salary. 4. The quality of free agents seems to decline each year, because most teams are using cap money to re-sign their own players (Fletcher, Clements and Kelsay will be among the top free agents available this year).

Very good points. I have wondered why the Bills are not more creative with their contracts. They could be pay guaranteed roster bonuses or other guaranteed bonuses to reduce the upfront bonus cost. The problem I have with the current approach is that the Bills will always be filling more holes than most teams and trying to replace their top players, because they will be the ones we cannot afford to re-sign. As you noted, what it means is that we will need to be better than the other teams in finding talent.