Cash

Bummer.

I was under the impression that they could only split the cap hit if they cut him some time after the bonus was payed out -- like March 21 or something? Or maybe they only had to cut him after the start of the league year, in which case they can split it. Could a capologist weigh in? I don't think it's "nothing" to do with the cap hit, but given the choice between cap hit of: A.) $10.x million cap hit, Fitz on the roster, $3 million bonus check gone, and about $4 million in salary guaranteed if Fitz makes the opening day roster -- whether he starts or not, or B.) $10.x million cap hit, need to fill another QB spot on the roster, no financial commitments yet (B) is the clear winner. The only way for Fitz to stay on the team would have been to take a salary the Bills were comfortable paying a backup, and waive most of that $3mil bonus. Fitz wasn't willing to do that, so away he goes. I'll be interested to see where he lands and for how much.

Yeah, I liked Fitz a lot, and I thank him for all his contributions and wish him well. The guy always did his best and played his heart out, and he's a winner off the field. Unfortunately, there are very few individuals good enough to be winning starting QBs in the NFL, and Fitz isn't one of those few.

Certainly seems that way, and if there was any doubt, I imagine this seals it. A marketing guy like Russ "This is a New Era" Brandon can't be happen about this kind of public embarrassment. But the Bills have surprised me before.

Thanks! Well, yes and no. Certainly if I had a secretary, and he said that a colleague from a company we do business with was on the line, I'd answer. And if the call immediately disconnected, I'd either call back or ask the secretary to do so for me. But if, after calling back several times, I hadn't heard anyone pick up, nor had I gotten the voicemail of who I thought it was (which Nix specifically said at the top of the call), I think I'd be pretty suspicious, and maybe verify that I've got the right number. Probably would've e-mailed the colleague in question to verify the number as well.

Agreed. Bill Barnwell had essentially the same take in a pretty good piece the other day: http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9039158/bill-barnwell-changes-nfl-free-agent-landscape

First off, apologies to the handful of fierce Nix defenders on this thread, but Nix looks like a buffoon. [EDIT: Not saying he IS a buffoon, just that that's going to be the popular perception, especially among non-Bills fans. Most of whom already think he is based on his Southern goober "not the smartest guy in the room" persona.] Anyone who gets pranked this easily comes across as very foolish, and Nix's age and demeanor add the element of making him look out of touch. Whatever. I don't particularly care, but it won't be fun dealing with the teasing at work once my co-workers hear about this. Maybe I can fly some of you guys out here to explain to them that this doesn't reflect negatively on Nix or the Bills, and that they should stop laughing? Secondly, I don't like these kind of pranks -- the Domino's prank that this is based off is incredibly mean and anyone who does it is a jerk -- but I'll admit that one of my greatest fan fantasies (aside from winning the Super Bowl) is to actually hear what the front office thinks in confidence. This isn't quite that, but it's pretty close, and WAY closer than anything I've heard before. So that's cool. And I'll agree with many others that from an embarrassment perspective, it could've been a lot worse. Lastly, there's one more silver lining: I'm actually enthused by a couple of Nix's comments. First, his Fitz comments are what most of us were hoping he was thinking. I know a certain poster has been harping on the idea that the Bills wouldn't and couldn't cut Fitz or else they'd lose all leverage with other free agent QBs and in the draft, but I never bought that idea, and it doesn't sound like Nix does, either. The other encouraging thing was Nix's comment on the 3-day discussion window. Specifically, "I tell ya, we're having trouble signing our own guys..." Given that McLovin signed like a day or two after this call took place, I'm guessing the Bills were already close to a deal when Nix said that. Which says to me that he's mostly talking about Levitre, which in turn says to me that the Bills really want him back and are making a real effort. That's good. My main fear with Levitre is that the Bills would pull a typical Bills move and let him walk without any real effort to retain him, then draft a replacement too high. If he really won't do what Stevie did last year (sign a fair but not exorbitant deal before free agency), and someone offers him a Poszluzny-type deal, then the Bills basically have to let him walk. But at least they made an effort.

I had literally never heard of this guy before seeing this thread. I'll admit, he seems to have a lively arm from the highlight video, but I wasn't super impressed overall. Plus his college numbers are atrocious when compared to guys who had NFL success. 8 TDs vs. 8 INTs is not what you want to see from a college senior. If they draft him in the 6th or 7th round, great. There's a solid 0.1% chance he becomes the next Brady. If, however, he's drafted in the 3rd round, and billed as the Bills' answer to Russell Wilson, we've got problems.

Ah, good one. And that was a fairly unique scenario, in that the ownership of the franchise had just changed hands, but the new owner allowed the old GM to hire a new coach. Usually new owners install their own GMs in place (at least when the team is bad, a la Jax), who then put their own HCs in place. Once Gene Smith was fired, it was no surprise that Mularkey was on his way afterwards.

Oh, I'm familiar with your study, and love it. But you and I have different definitions/criteria for something like "decent starter". My minimum standards don't meet any of your study's 3 criteria. And I make no promises that any of these QBs will succeed with their first team, which also fails your study's criteria. I did a similar study a few years ago with more inclusive criteria for "starter", and the results were roughly 50% of 1st rounders, 25% of 2nd rounders, 10% of 3rd rounders, and 0-5% for the other rounds, with the 6th round being an outlier. Although I'll admit that even at the time, I thought my criteria for being a starter were too inclusive, which is part of the reason I never updated it.

Gabbert's exactly the reasons I don't want us to draft any non-Geno QB at #8. He's the only one I'm willing to take a 3-year flier on, because no matter how bad your Top 15 (or maybe even 1st round) QB plays, you have to give him about 3 years before you can cut him and move on. Unless, of course, a better option wins the job and plays well, in which case you can let the high pick ride the pine. But when the backup plays at Kelly Holcomb level, the #1 pick is going to get back into the starting lineup pretty soon. Anyway, I think Gabbert's a total bust, and he's (so far) one of the few QB prospects I was exactly right on. But I don't disagree with your logic in the abstract -- nobody wants to be the Tampa Bay in Steve Young's career. However, my last post wasn't so much intended as a disagreement with "wait and see on Gabbert", more a friendly correction on this statement: Last year was Blaine's second year, and to his credit, he did significantly raise his game. I'm actually interested to see if his career can be salvaged at this point. Like I said, if he takes another jump next year, that puts him at about league average.

Ouch, poor Blaine. Apparently his play is so underwhelming that you blocked his entire rookie year out of your head. Blaine was drafted in 2011, same as Cam Newton, and played 15 games. Last year, he played in 10 games before getting hurt, and improved his numbers from "historically abysmal" to "really bad." A similar jump next year would put him at about league average. Interestingly enough, you aren't the only one to mind-wipe his rookie season. NFL.com's player page still lists him as a rookie: http://www.nfl.com/player/blainegabbert/2495441/careerstats

Some very good discussion in this thread. I agree with several that Geno is a legitimate first-round prospect, and I'd be very comfortable drafting him at #8. If he's not there at #8, I'd prefer the Bills go in a different direction (possibly trading down), and take a flier on a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round. To me, it's a pretty underwhelming QB class, but the odds are pretty good that at least one of the Wilson/Bray/Nassib/Manuel/etc. group becomes at least a decent starter. I have zero clue about which one(s), though. EDIT: Except that I think Glennon will be an absolute bust. Any time the argument for a QB prospect comes down to something like, "don't look at his numbers, just look at his arm" I'm extremely skeptical.

Your estimate might be right, I just tend to think he'll be paid closer to what T-Jack got last year. Their career numbers and records as starters are roughly comparable. We'll see. Or maybe we won't, per your point about unpaid guaranteed money. That's certainly a possibility, and if it's true that there's still guaranteed money left on his deal, I'll change my opinion on Fitz's contract. I had always defended the contract (though not necessarily the player), because I had been under the impression that it was lower-tier starter money with no heavy penalties to cutting him after 2012. But if he essentially can't be cut without hamstringing the Bills, then it's a terrible deal and the Bills look even more foolish. Very good breakdown! I intentionally neglected the future cap implications, for 2 reasons: First and foremost, most businesses, including NFL teams, are very short-sighted in their financial/accounting concerns. They're typically focused on what the balance sheet looks like for the next year, maybe 18 months at most. For NFL teams specifically, there's the added pressure of fielding a winner THIS YEAR, with no guarantee of continued employment next year. Tough to say exactly how short-sighted the Bills are in this respect. On one hand, Marrone just started, and head coaches are almost always given multiple years to show something. (Cam Cameron got fired after going 1-15 his first year, but I can't think of any other "1 and done" off the top of my head.) But we don't know much input he has into personnel decisions, especially when it comes to contract concerns. If Nix is truly still in charge, as the Bills claim, one would think he's feeling a great deal of "win now" pressure -- the team has been worse under him than it was the previous 3 years, he's on his 2nd head coach, etc. But even Nix has openly admitted that he doesn't handle player contracts -- that's Jim Overdorf. Overdorf, Jeff Littman, and Russ Brandon are the only 3 members of the Buffalo Bills I know of who enjoy significant job security. So all in all, I have no idea who is calling the shots or what that person's mindset is. The second reason was that I didn't have time and didn't want to put in that much effort anyway. So I thank you for your time and effort. I personally agree with you -- I'd rather bite the bullet now and move on, if Fitz won't agree to a restructure that the team can live with. But my point is that the team might not see it that way. Especially if, as GG speculates, there's still guaranteed money left on Fitz's deal. (For the record, even in that scenario, I'd probably still favor cutting Fitz and moving on if he won't restructure. The guaranteed money is a sunk cost. We've seen what Fitz can do, and it's not enough, so let's part ways and get on with trying to find the next guy.)

I respectfully disagree with your estimate of $5 mil 2013 compensation for Free Agent Fitz, but this is fundamentally the right analysis. It's easy to get hung up on the idea that if the Bills cut Fitz outright, they don't "save" any money, but that's not really accurate. The cap hit is about the same whether he's cut or kept on his current deal, but the cash he would actually receive is very different in those two scenarios. For the purpose of this post, I'm assuming that the Bills have fulfilled their minimum salary obligation, as GG puts it -- i.e., paid out all of the guaranteed money in the deal. I'm assuming that because the Buffalo News has reported it as being the case, and also because it makes things much simpler to discuss. Anyway, assuming that's the case, Fitz is looking at about $7.5 mil if he stays on the roster with his existing contract. This would obviously be his first choice. But getting cut would only net him whatever salary + bonus he can get from another team. GG estimates that at about $5 mil, I think it's more like $2-$3 mil, but either way, it's less than what he'd get on his current deal. So if Fitz gets cut, both parties wind up unhappy: The Bills saved about $7.5 mil in real checks they didn't have to write, but don't get any cap room. Fitz has to uproot his family and sees his pay drop significantly. So there's a window for a mutually beneficial compromise. Fitz renegotiates his contract to take less money this year, but still more than he'd get on the open market, and the Bills save cap money in the process. Of course, the more he gets paid, the less happy the Bills are, because that's real money going out the door, and not necessarily enough cap savings to justify it. And the less he gets paid, the unhappier Fitz is, for obvious reasons. Especially if he and/or his agent think that he can get a comparable deal on the open market. So there's no guarantee that both sides can come to an agreement on a renegotiation, but there's absolutely good reasons on both sides to at least try a negotiation.

Love it! For everyone clamoring for the Bills to sign Delanie Walker, we essentially already have him on the roster in the form of Dickerson. Very similar players, except Walker is a role player on a very good team, whereas Dickerson was an underutilized asset on a terrible team.

People have been saying that since Nix took over. This is the 4th straight offseason of "let's fill other needs first, then draft a QB next year" talk. For real, 4 straight years. (And yet, the other needs don't seem to be filled yet.) For that reason, plus the new front office structure/coaching regime, I think there's virtually no chance that the Bills don't draft a QB in rounds 1-3, and they'll probably draft one in round 1. I kind of think the most likely scenario is that they take a defensive player at #8, then immediately start trying to trade back into the first round for a QB. For the record, I do not like this approach. Like others, I think this is a really weak QB class, and drafting one in the 1st just because you're desperate is how you wind up with Blaine Gabbert, Christian Ponder, or Jake Locker. If Jimmy Claussen had been drafted in the 1st round instead of the 2nd, the Panthers never would've drafted Cam Newton one year later. I'm comfortable with taking that chance with Geno Smith at #8, but beyond him, I say stay put and take whomever's left at #41. If we get lucky, awesome. If not, I really like Murray and Boyd next year.

The other thing to keep in mind when voting on depth is that you're comparing it to depth league-wide. Aside from the Patriots, how many teams have a really good backup TE? Ed Dickson in Baltimore is decent, but not exactly a game-breaker (neither is the starter Dennis Pitta, for that matter). There are a couple others, but for the most part, backup TEs are very anonymous, and for good reason.

I wouldn't be surprised either, but I would be irate.

As of a couple years ago, yes. Dunno if it's been changed since, but the last time I read about this, the rule was that a player had to purchase any unsold inventory of his jersey in order to switch numbers. Mario's jersey sold really well last year, but that was to be expected, so they obviously printed a ton. I have no idea how many are still circulating out there.

Voted "below average" for starting only b/c of Chandler's injury and the likelihood that he'll miss all of training camp/preseason and significant time in the regular season. If Chandler was healthy, I'd probably say average or maybe even above average. I initially voted "bad" for depth, but upon further review, I'm upgrading it. Lee Smith is a good blocker and if we're counting Dickerson here, I like him a lot.

I'm not the biggest SU fan, but I definitely liked Shamarko a lot. No one is going to be happy with the comparison I'm about to make, but here it is: He reminds me of Donte Whitner, except a little bigger and a better athlete. Very good in run support, physical, big hitter, makes a lot of tackles, didn't really make many big plays at SU. For a guy who was probably the best athlete on the field in most games (or close to it -- I wasn't surprised by his sick combine numbers), I think a lot of us expected more in terms of interceptions, forced fumbles, sacks on blitzes, etc. He only finished with 2 career INTs, both this past year. I wouldn't call Shamarko a disappointment, because he was a good player, and I don't remember him blowing all kinds of coverages or getting run over like Whitner, but his upside at SU was higher than his production turned out to be. Still, I'd absolutely draft him in the middle rounds. He's a good/smart safety and an elite NFL athlete for the position. I think he'll be a good player.

Same methodology for the 2004 draft: Eli Manning - NYG (starter) - please don't start any nonsense about how he was drafted by the Chargers. It was a draft-day trade. Whether the trade occurred before the selections or after is irrelevant. Larry Fitzgerald - ARI (starter) Philip Rivers - SD (starter) Ben Roethlisberger - PIT (starter) D.J. Williams - DEN (backup) Will Smith - NO (starter) Vince Wilfork - NE (starter) Steven Jackson - STL (starter) Chris Gamble - CAR (starter) I don't have time to do the 2nd round, but I will do the 2006 first round: D'Brickashaw Ferguson - NYJ (starter) A.J. Hawk - GB (starter) Vernon Davis - SF (starter) Michael Huff - OAK (starter) Haloti Ngata - BAL (starter) Chad Greenway - MIN (starter) Tamba Hali - KC (starter) Davin Joseph - TB (starter in 2011, missed all last year w/ injury, may be a backup going forward) DeAngelo Williams - CAR (part-time starter) Marcedes Lewis - JAX (starter) Nick Mangold - NYJ (starter) Mathias Kiwanuka - NYG (starter) So 9 from 2004 (8 starters), 8 from 2005 (7 starters), and 12 from 2006 (arguably 12 starters, though I wouldn't necessarily buy the argument). 2005 seems to be a slight dip in terms of 1st-round quality, because you'd expect this number to go down every year you go back. I imagine the biggest dip would be between 5 years back and 6 years back, since most 1st-rounders get 5 year deals.

But does he have a nose for the ball? In his first 3 years (1 as a part-time starter, 2 as a full-time starter), Te'o had a total of 0 interceptions. The 7 in his senior year look really fluky. On the other hand, his pass breakups (per wikipedia) were 1, 3, 2, & 4 in his 4 years -- last year was his best, but those are fairly consistent.

Because no team (that I can think of) has ever drafted QBs in the first round in consecutive drafts, and the Bills are definitely not going to be the first. That is why. If you think that the best available QB prospect is another Blaine Gabbert, you are truly better off drafting no one than drafting him at #8. The Jaguars are STILL talking about building around Gabbert, even with a new coach and GM. Even if that's smoke, there's still the part where the Jags passed on taking another QB last year because they were committed to Gabbert. Now, if the Bills wait even till the 2nd round to draft a QB, and he stinks, then we absolutely could see the Bills draft a QB in the 1st next year. But in the real world, giving up on a 1st-rounder after 1 year simply isn't done. And drafting another QB in the 1st is absolutely a form of giving up on the last guy.