PDaDdy Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 even though Senator beat me to it, The Bills drafting Bucky Brooks in the second round was an act of desperation. He was such a good receiver that he got converted to DB after being cut in his second training camp. If Bucky Brooks knew anything about desperation, he may have worked harder to be a good pro player as opposed to hammering on his former team in a crappy column. Bucky is a symbol of a bad John Butler pick along with the second rounder before him John Parella who revived his career after being waken up by being cut. What does his crappy performance on the field have to do with his accurate assessment of Merriman as an analyst? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 without the juice....he won't produce.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) without the juice....he won't produce.... +1 As much as people are trying to wreck Brooks he didn't even mention the fact that he is off the juice. Throw that in and it is pretty obvious to me the guy is and has been done. He's already on the team so all I can do is hope against all reason and logic that he can become useful. Edited July 12, 2011 by PDaDdy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 That amount of money is the difference between resigning a probowler or trying to replace them with an undrafted free agent. That amount of money is the difference between bringing in an impact free agent and a guy that just holds a roster spot that will disappoint and be released in 2 or 3 years. Big picture man. That is the downside. Bucky Brookes sucked as a player. Ya. So what? What bearing does that have on his opinion as a football analyst? ....NONE!!! I am looking at the 'big picture'...not sure you are, though. NFL rookie minimum is $325K, so I think the Bills will still have enough cap room to invite a few to camp and see if they can make more of an impact than the 3-time Pro Bowl Shawne Merriman. As for an 'impact free agent' - which one do you have in mind that the Bills can sign for $2.5M (the am't guaranteed in year one of Merriman's contract)? That amount is peanuts for an 'impact player'. And frankly, if Merriman does returns anywhere close to pre-2008-injury form and get even close to being the dominant, unstoppable pass-rusher he was for the first 3 years of his career, then $9.2M/year is about right for that quality of player, yes? Still, the article was long enough to fill some space - which is, I guess, what Brooks needed to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 without the juice....he won't produce.... Without the juice he posted 12.5 sacks, was named 2nd team All Pro, and made the Pro Bowl in 2007. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDD Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 That amount of money is the difference between resigning a probowler or trying to replace them with an undrafted free agent. That amount of money is the difference between bringing in an impact free agent and a guy that just holds a roster spot that will disappoint and be released in 2 or 3 years. Big picture man. That is the downside. Bucky Brookes sucked as a player. Ya. So what? What bearing does that have on his opinion as a football analyst? ....NONE!!! Valid points. By the way, I read an article where the Giants may pursue Puz. Let's see. A superbowl winning and successful franchise near NYC or Buffalo? Add MLB to the Bills long list of needs. without the juice....he won't produce.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I am looking at the 'big picture'...not sure you are, though. NFL rookie minimum is $325K, so I think the Bills will still have enough cap room to invite a few to camp and see if they can make more of an impact than the 3-time Pro Bowl Shawne Merriman. I believe you mean off the juice ineffective for the last 3 years destroyed knees Merriman not "probowl" last decade Merriman. As for an 'impact free agent' - which one do you have in mind that the Bills can sign for $2.5M (the am't guaranteed in year one of Merriman's contract)? That amount is peanuts for an 'impact player'. Ah, the old which impact free agent defense. How about Tyson Clabo AND Zach Miller? Impact enough for you? And frankly, if Merriman does returns anywhere close to pre-2008-injury form and get even close to being the dominant, unstoppable pass-rusher he was for the first 3 years of his career, then $9.2M/year is about right for that quality of player, yes? Absolutely and if I spend a years salary on lottery tickets and win the mega millions it would be worth it. The sad fact of the matter is it is so unlikely that it is nearly impossible. What are you not understanding about his destroyed knees, no more juice and his inability to play like pre-injury/pre-juice 2008 form? He will never be the same because of BOTH of those factors. They are huge! We are not talking about him being 95% of his former self. We are talking about him likely being a shadow and I mean shadow of his former self. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hplarrm Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 However, is there really a high risk here if Bucky Brooks is correct and this contract is heavily incentive laden. If the incentives chosen are correct (and Bucky gives no details or even insights as to what they are) then the Bills only pay them IF Merriman produces. Bucky is simply incorrect in saying that the Bills are "all-in" with an incentive laden contract. They went all in on Rob Johnson with his guaranteed contract and when he proved to be injury prone we lost. Add to this insult the "injury" of Doug Flutie producing just as some Bills scouts predicted and hitting all of his incentives which then by contract were rolled into his base salary that the Bills were simply forced to sign Flutie long term to spread his cap hit out. This was all in and the Merriman situation is not. Perhaps one could make this case of the Bills being sorta all in if they were totally relying on Merriman to play OLB. Actually on the contrary as: 1. There had not been an FA period yet and the Bills might either sign additional OLB help and clearly are trying to resign Pos (whom I always saw as a better fit for us as an OLB based on his natural collegiate position rather than us having him learn by getting burned at ILB. 2. In fact, the Bills used their draft picks to heavily weigh toward rebuilding the D with the first 4 picks being D choices (perhaps providing the compliment Brooks says is needed for Merriman) and one of these was an ILB (again freeing up Pos to move OLB. Likewise they even picked a second ILB who is envisioned as making the team. i think Bucky makes a legit point that Merriman is likely done. However, he utterly fails to support the notion that the Bills are all in on Merriman. In fact, given the likelhood that the new salary cap expenditure minimum may well force the Bills to spend more on salary, this incentive laden deal is simply chump change at $2.5 million. RJ got a $5 million bonus and that was back in the day so the Merriman incentive laden contract really is next to nothing in terms of risk for the Bills. I'll ask the same question of you. What about Merriman's "performance" in the last THREE YEARS gives you optimism of any sort about this signing??? Can you show me any non QB that has played so poorly after sustaining significant injuries and getting off the juice that has had any significant impact in his 4th year down the road? As stated. $2.5 million dollars can be the difference between signing an impact player and a guy that just takes up space on the roster. This is not low risk high reward. It is the exact opposite. High risk with low reward. Basically if we get lucky, and I do mean LUCKY, Merriman will be a Chris Kelsay style role player. By the numbers Kelsay has outplayed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) Without the juice he posted 12.5 sacks, was named 2nd team All Pro, and made the Pro Bowl in 2007. GO BILLS!!! ANNNHHH. As you well know the 2007 season is played mainly in 2006. Shawne Merriman was notified in the middle of the 2006 season that he would be suspended for steroids. There was an Oct 26th 2006 ESPN article detailing exactly this. (The 2007 season you reference). He was still obviously benefiting from an off season and likely in season use of the juice when he posted those 12.5 sacks. It's not like you lose all of the muscle mass and endurance over night. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2635475 Edited July 12, 2011 by PDaDdy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) What does his crappy performance on the field have to do with his accurate assessment of Merriman as an analyst? A desperate act is not one of taking a flyer on some guy on waivers and signing him to a low risk contract? It would be a desperate act if they offered him $10million/year with a large bonus. Thus Bucky should zip it, as he was more worried about getting Lucky Charms from Shredd and Reagan during rookie season. ANNNHHH. As you well know the 2007 season is played mainly in 2006. Shawne Merriman was notified in the middle of the 2006 season that he would be suspended for steroids. There was an Oct 26th 2006 ESPN article detailing exactly this. (The 2007 season you reference). He was still obviously benefiting from an off season and likely in season use of the juice when he posted those 12.5 sacks. It's not like you lose all of the muscle mass and endurance over night. http://sports.espn.g...tory?id=2635475 Wrong. When they list Pro Bowl seasons, it is for the year of the season. He did have 12.5 sacks off the juice and was named a Pro Bowler for that season. Even though the Pro Bowl itself is played in the next calendar year, he made the Pro Bowl for the 2007 season "steroid free". Edited July 12, 2011 by justnzane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Ah, the old which impact free agent defense. How about Tyson Clabo AND Zach Miller? Impact enough for you? Ah, the old 'I really suck at simple arithmetic' rebuttal! Clabo's 2010 salary alone was over $2.5 - and he's a RFA, so Atlanta can always match the $4-5M he's hoping to fetch on the open market. As for Zach Miller, well, he wants to remain with Oakland and the franchise # for TE's was around $7M - so I think it'd cost the Bills a little 'north of $2.5M' for both Clabo AND Miller. In fact, you couldn't sign either one of 'em for $2.5M. Care to try again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted July 12, 2011 Author Share Posted July 12, 2011 As you well know the 2007 season is played mainly in 2006. Interesting. Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Interesting. Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 A desperate act is not one of taking a flyer on some guy on waivers and signing him to a low risk contract? It would be a desperate act if they offered him $10million/year with a large bonus. Thus Bucky should zip it, as he was more worried about getting Lucky Charms from Shredd and Reagan during rookie season. Disregarding good information because of a bias towards the writer is not smart. You don't like what he has to say so you attempt to discredit his valid opinion because you think he has an ax to grind. Wrong. When they list Pro Bowl seasons, it is for the year of the season. He did have 12.5 sacks off the juice and was named a Pro Bowler for that season. Even though the Pro Bowl itself is played in the next calendar year, he made the Pro Bowl for the 2007 season "steroid free". Wrong again. No he didn't! You realize that the 2007 season starts in September of 2006 right? If he was in the 2007 pro bowl it was largely based on games he played in 2006. The news of his impending suspension was released in October 2006 around week 6 of the 2007 season at which point he challenged the suspension. This means that entering the 2007 season (Sep 2006) he was on the juice. He likely finished the season off of it but as I mentioned it's not like you wake up the next morning and you lose all the muscle mass that you built and endurance you gained while on the stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 ANNNHHH. As you well know the 2007 season is played mainly in 2006. Shawne Merriman was notified in the middle of the 2006 season that he would be suspended for steroids. There was an Oct 26th 2006 ESPN article detailing exactly this. (The 2007 season you reference). He was still obviously benefiting from an off season and likely in season use of the juice when he posted those 12.5 sacks. It's not like you lose all of the muscle mass and endurance over night. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2635475 ANNNHHH. Again, your 'facility' with simple numbers is astounding. I guess we played the 2011 season last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 ANNNHHH. As you well know the 2007 season is played mainly in 2006. Shawne Merriman was notified in the middle of the 2006 season that he would be suspended for steroids. There was an Oct 26th 2006 ESPN article detailing exactly this. (The 2007 season you reference). He was still obviously benefiting from an off season and likely in season use of the juice when he posted those 12.5 sacks. It's not like you lose all of the muscle mass and endurance over night. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2635475 The 2007 season was played mainly in 2006? That's just not true and isn't open to debate. I won't waste your time. Merriman served his entire suspension in November of 2006 and he has been subject to random testing since then. To my knowledge he hasn't failed any drug test since his suspension. To suggest he was still "obviously benefiting" from steroid use in 2007 given the amount of scrutiny he had been under since failing his drug test a year earlier is a bit of a stretch to say the least. Merriman may indeed be washed up due to injury. We'll see. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) Wrong again. No he didn't! You realize that the 2007 season starts in September of 2006 right? If he was in the 2007 pro bowl it was largely based on games he played in 2006. The news of his impending suspension was released in October 2006 around week 6 of the 2007 season at which point he challenged the suspension. This means that entering the 2007 season (Sep 2006) he was on the juice. He likely finished the season off of it but as I mentioned it's not like you wake up the next morning and you lose all the muscle mass that you built and endurance you gained while on the stuff. Wrong again. Merriman was drafted in 2005, yet was defensive rookie of the year for 2005 and made the 2005 Pro Bowl. That would have been for the 2004 season then, while he was still in college, right? Try looking up any players stats for the 2011 season. You won't find any, because it doesn't begin until September of 2011. . Edited July 12, 2011 by The Senator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) Ah, the old 'I really suck at simple arithmetic' rebuttal! Clabo's 2010 salary alone was over $2.5 - and he's a RFA, so Atlanta can always match the $4-5M he's hoping to fetch on the open market. As for Zach Miller, well, he wants to remain with Oakland and the franchise # for TE's was around $7M - so I think it'd cost the Bills a little 'north of $2.5M' for both Clabo AND Miller. In fact, you couldn't sign either one of 'em for $2.5M. Care to try again? Ah the old I I really suck at arithmetic and don't understand the meaning of "difference" vs "equal to" and don't bother to read and understand what people write that I am desperately trying to win and argument with defense. Do you even read what people write or just make something up and rail against it? I said $2.5 million could be the "difference" between signing an impact free agent and a guy that just takes up a roster spot. See? Difference means the difference between the salaries of the 2 players, impact and non impact, not equal to the salary of the "impact" player. Care to try again? Edited July 12, 2011 by PDaDdy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) You make some good points, eball, but there's one aspect about the contract numbers that I think a few people are missing . . . The $2.5M they'll spend this year on Merriman is not going to prevent the Bills from doing what they need/want to do elsewhere on the roster. It's my understanding that base player salaries aren't guaranteed in the NFL, so those contracts generally work like this: Total compensation = guaranteed money + base salary + incentives The article says if Merriman hits all of his incentives, his total compensation for the 2 year contract will be $18.5 million (an average of $9.25 million/yr), with only $2.5 million of it guaranteed. If you subtract the guaranteed $2.5 million from his highest possible total compensation of $18.5 million over 2 years, you can determine that, over the 2 year term of Merriman's contract: Base salary + maximum incentives = $16 million. At least from Bucky's article, you can't really tell how much of the $16 million would be base salary, and how much of the $16 million would be from hitting maximum incentives. I haven't looked to see if a more detailed breakdown of Merriman's contract is available elsewhere, but I'm hoping that his base salary is close to the veteran minimum. I hope he plays great, but I can't tell anything from the Bucky Brooks article about how much of the non-guaranteed $16 million is base salary, and how much would be from hitting incentives. Does anybody know what Merriman's base salary is for this year or next? Edited July 12, 2011 by ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) Wrong again. Try looking up any players stats for the 2011 season. You won't find any, because it doesn't begin until September of 2011. . You are absolutely correct. I was thinking of the superbowl. In 2007 Merriman should have been steroid free. It was in 2008 when he had the knee injury that his performance dropped off. So he had one year while he was losing the benefits of the juice and his knees were healthy and he performed well. Unfortunately in the in the 3 years since 2007 he has done jack squat. Seems like a long enough time for somebody to get back to form if they were ever going to get back to form. The Shawne Merriman we currently have on our team is both off the juice and has bad knee(s). Edited July 12, 2011 by PDaDdy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts