SectionC3

Number four does it for me. I want guys that will go to battle for each other.

Viewed in isolation, must of this stuff is youthful stupidity and/or no big deal. It's the pattern of behavior that is the problem. I think the kid probably is a punk, but I like his arm talent and I love his compete. I would be fine with drafting him (at a reasonable spot) if for no other reason than to push Cardale. Of course, the other consideration is that it would be oh-so-Billsy for us to pass on the kid and then have him play well for a rival. Same thing holds true for Kizer. Flip his 2015 and 2016 seasons and he might have gone first overall.

Good clarification. I've long felt that all agents should be lawyers. This mess reinforces that view.

The more I think about this, the more questions I have about the PA's practice of disclosing offers. I don't think there is a problem with permitting access to offers made to a certain player during a single negotiating cycle AFTER that player has signed. But it seems like offers are disclosed BEFORE the player signs. That, to me, is dangerous. Players are in competition with each other for jobs. Why encourage them to undercut each other? This is a real mess, and I would be livid if I was the player.

I'm not as definitive on that, but keeping garrapolo easily could be seen as a hedge against a Brady departure/age-related regression.

I have no idea if this has happened before. Probably a bigger threat to player than to Bills - after all, agent should have particulars of all offers, whereas the agent might not release details of offers to other teams where there are multiple teams bidding for the player's services so as to drive up the bids. -- This becomes a bigger issue for the bills if this player doesn't sign. Other teams bidding against us for the next WR4 we would target would know likely structure of our bid. To that end, if I was the bills I would have reservations about doing business with this agent again. And from the agent's perspective, the publication of these details better not result in the reduction of a higher offer. Somebody - be it the agent or the PA - very easily could be repsonsible for the amount of the reduction. And not good for the agent's practice.

Not sure what code of conduct is at issue. But if I was the player I would have a lot of questions about what happened. I suspect that, if the client is compliant, the agent will try to push him into a deal ASAP to make this mess go away.

There but for the grace of God go us all. Very well said.

This is a really bad look for the agent/PA. Can't imagine the bills are thrilled about the publication of the structure of their offer. Assuming the bills are not the high biddder/high guaranteed offer, client could have legitimate concern that the "better" offer is reduced in view of terms of bills' offer. Could also impact this agent's dealings with teams regarding other clients.

This is a good point. The last time the ravens played here flacco threw a rainbow that went further than any ball I have seen thrown in 30+ years of going to games in our stadium. It was the play on which Aaron Williams made a shoestring, touchdown-saving tackle.

This. PFT has reported that the Jets are interested in Griffin. Normally I would be thrilled that a division rival is interested in the worst starting quarterback, if not the worst quarterback, in the league. Then the "suck for Sam" thought occurred to me. Anyone who has delusions about griffin should read Chris Colley's takedown piece from a few years ago. It says all anyone needs to know about griffin.

I hope whoever voted yes has wide fingers. Unreal.

This is one thing we can all agree on: someday, hopefully soon, this team will win double-digit games in the regular season, make the playoffs, and give us something positive to talk about. May we then never need debate "czar," "privvy," or "chasm."

damage control. To the next "laconjecture" poster I preemptively ask: how do we know lacanfora got played by his source(s) w the "chasm" report and wawrow did not get similarly played w his "no chasm" report?

If the holdovers wanted Tyrod gone before a new coach was hired, they absolutely could have cut him. And then dealt with the risk of a grievance resulting from tyrods abdominal injury/surgery. Maybe Ty's agent sensed that ty might have a better shot with a new coach than with the holdovers and used the surgery to buy a little time. The notion that the holdovers wanted ty out would explain the bills' "elective surgery" press release.

Very reasonable point. Good post.

And it's also an assumption that they agree. I doubt anybody outside of the building knows the real story. For what it's worth, assuming that the franchise uses the committee approach, its easy to see how there would be friction with respect to this decision. This admittedly is speculation, but I can see how mcd might think that Tyrod is average, but also a better option than anything Whaley has suggested so far for next year. If Whaley is pushing cardale, if crossman (mcd's link to last year) tells mcd jones is lazy, and if Crossman tells McDermott that Tyrod is both a hard worker and respected by the players, then I can see how mcd would not be keen to stake his hc career on jones and would prefer to retain Taylor. Again, though, the point remains that all of this is speculation.

This leak isnt Russ. No way Russ would say he made the call on Tyrod. But don't doubt that Russ talks.

Well said. And I'll add that these points support the idea that the bills may have an interest in Siemian. Perhaps Denison prefers Siemian but, absent that option, wants Tyrod.

Your premise is that what lacanfora reported is untrue because (a) it came from lacanfora and (b) it is not possible that Whaley and McDermott are not in lockstep re the QB in early March because Whaley hired McDermott in early to mid-January. Could it be that pegula hired the hc (don't they both report directly to pegula?) with the understanding that McDermott would study Taylor and participate in a collaborative decision making process with Whaley regarding taylor's future? If so, isn't it possible that mcdermott's film study led him to a conclusion (keep Taylor) different from that reached by whaley (move on from Taylor)? Frankly I would be surprised if McDermott had a strong opinion on Taylor during the interview process bc it's unlikely mcd had the chance to study Taylor before that time. The most obvious answer for mcd to give during the process is that he needed to review the film. If that's the case, it's entirely possible that, following film study, he feels differently from Whaley in this isssue.

Who says Whaley hired the coach? This reeks of a Berchtold leak. What better way to get back at brandon for dumping him. I imagine the guy who paid $1.4B for the franchise would be none too happy to hear that one of his business employees is deciding the fate of the most important position in the franchise.

Cyrus for Siemian makes a ton of sense. I agree on romo - he makes us an instant contender for basically the same money as ty, and buys us a few years to identify the "next" guy.

Quick question. You know your business, and I respect your opinion. What is Tyrod's trade value? I ask because I'm intrigued by the idea of using a Tyrod /Siemian exchange to "jump" a round in the draft (e.g. trade Ty for a two and trade a three for Siemian) and applying the newfound cap space to obtain help at RT, S, LB, etc. For what it's worth, my intuition is that you're on to something with Tyrod. I suspect the front office sees him as a viable "bridge"-type option, but not the preferred option for the next few years. If he was the guy, then it seems to me McDermott would have said as much at his recent media availability. Edit: I'll add this: the though has crossed my mind that Whaley might be dangling pick 10 + Tyrod to climb way up the draft. Getting Siemian on the cheap might be a way to help make this happen. And it fits with the buzz that Whaley was looking to move up (albeit for a QB).

Seems like the Siemian talk today might have made this relevant again. The idea of moving Tyrod and replacing him with Siemian has started to grow on me. The net gain in cap space could get us two to three more good players. It's worth considering.

A few things. 1. After the Whaley "pirivvy" disaster, the bills did damage control with terry and Kim in two places. Kim called GR if I recall correctly, and I believe terry called the AP. It was no accident that the bills reached out to those two outlets. Assuming I'm right about the reporter who got the terry interview, I can see how some people would question John's view of this situation. 2. I am very close to someone who has been around the Bills on and off for about 30 years and who has worked regulalry with Berchtold during that time. In John's defense, he told me basically the same things that John has said here. Berchtold is a straight shooter and overall a good guy who can run hot and cold. But on the whole, if you treat him professionally he treats you the same way and will get you what you need. 3. The one additional thing I heard is that Berchtold could have worked a little better with the local media. The gist was, Chris Berman gets anything and everything, but the local guys generally get iced on what they want. Perhaps that has contributed to the bills longstanding battles with the locals. More on this later. 4. This firing is big news because it seemingly is the first dumping of a member of the old guard. To be clear, Berchtold had less than nothing to do with on field performance. But his firing suggests that no one - including the team president - is safe. 5. the firing is also interesting because it is possible there is a little palace intrigue going on here. Did Berchtold catch a bullet because of his responsibility for the messes in December? Or was Berchtold made the scapegoat for that? If it's the latter, it suggests more dysfunction inasmuch as a longtime employee just met the wheels on the bus, and may have been thrown there by someone seeking to avoid the same fate. 6. One thing that has been lost here is the importance of the pr staff in manipulating media. leaks aren't always bad things, and they often are by design. Sometimes the team wants certain things in the paper, e.g., they might want to plant a story that they are in on romo as leverage in a renegotiation with Tyrod. I question how well that was done with the locals over the years, who, as noted, seemingly didn't get as much as the nationals in terms of what they wanted. 7. The whole idea on this board lately of questioning the credibility of reporters is absurd. Believe it not, journalists have ethics -- strong ones at that --, and there are way too many posters who make negative assumptions about reporters in general simply because the posters disagree with what has been reported. We are very lucky to have someone like John share with us, and to have others contribute anonymously. Thank, John, for your insight and professionalism, and keep up the good work.