BillsGuyInMalta Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 What's funny is that the Rotoworld article in question has been edited. When it was first posted it read "He isn't worth $8 million a year." I know because I was going to post it on The Wall to discuss how inaccurate the contract numbers are, they were clearly using Mark Anderson's initial contract numbers that were inaccurately reported. The article now has changed to reflect the "5 million a year" statement, but the rest of it is unchanged. So apparently shaving off 3 million a year STILL makes Mark Anderson overpaid. Poor guy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Agree that this sounds very negative and very pointed. Bills wanted a DE that can rush the passer to compliment Williams. If that makes teams like the pats opt for the run, I am all for it. Oh, it's not all about sacks. Anyone watching a healthy merrimen in the first few games can see how disruptive pressure causes picks, fewer open wrs and less precise passing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Anyone on this message board could literally stop what they are doing right now, do 30 minutes of research and write just about any article on Rotoworld. As w/ most NFL offseason articles, people are just searching for something to write about. Anderson went for roughly market value. If we judge what FAs are overpaid based on intrinsic worth, 90% of the guys aren't worth what they are paid, but the market has set the price. That being said, I think the criticism over his inability to defend the run is worth noting. But he played a lot of downs for the Pats and didn't end too poorly for them. I'm not sure I'd need the 30 minuets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Plus, DEs are always going to be overpaid. QBs, DEs, and OTs are the premium positions in the league. And I hope someone shows Anderson this article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 (edited) "While Buffalo's team sack total will rise in 2012, offenses will know exactly which front-four member to target on running plays: Mark Anderson." It is never impressive when someone makes an obvious factual statement, but treats it like a big reveal and proof of their argument. Wow. Teams will run at Anderson given their choice of the Bills front four? They won't run at two of the best run stopping DTs in the NFL or a DE who might be the best run stuffing 4-3 DE in the league? Instead they will run at the other guy? Well that does it, that other guy must be overpaid. Forget for a second that there are probably only 5-10 guys in the entire NFL who teams wouldn't run towards when facing the other three options on the Bills line. In his first draft did the writer include the fact that Anderson is also overpaid because he isn't likely to be as effective at throwing the football as Fitzpatrick? I hope they do run at Anderson ALL DAY. That way we will know where they are going and our LB can flow to the ball carrier and drop him for losses or short gains. If you had any other option why would you rush at Dareus, KW and Super Mario? As you stated there aren't many other guys in the league that you wouldn't run at when presented with the other 3 options. Edited April 5, 2012 by PDaDdy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Support in the run game is what LB's are for. Just sayin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExWNYer Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Per Evan Silva of Rotoworld:http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40242 5. Bills defensive end Mark Anderson After re-signing Stevie Johnson, the Bills turned all of their attention to upgrading the front seven, and that aggressiveness was honorable. They made Mario Williams the highest paid defender in NFL history, and then followed it up by signing Anderson to be Mario's weak-side bookend. Buffalo had a plan, and it executed. But Anderson was overpaid in the process, and there are likely people in the Bills' organization who would acknowledge as much. He isn't worth $5 million a year. Anderson is going on age 29. He's been in the league for six seasons, and in just two of them recorded more than five sacks. Anderson is consistently washed out in run defense and is essentially a one-down end. The Bills will give him a chance to be an every-snap player, but it almost certainly won't end well. While Buffalo's team sack total will rise in 2012, offenses will know exactly which front-four member to target on running plays: Mark Anderson. I guess since the Pats* didn't sign him he's overpaid, right Silva? BTW, no mention of Demetress Bell?? Whatever. Nothing to see here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 We can either have one of two of the following articles written about the Bills in the offseason...... Ralph is cheap.....the bills once again face another season of missing the playoffs and medocrity because the Bills organization does not appear to be serious about winning.....the loyal bills fans deserve better bla bla bla or The bills were extremely activing this offseason....showing their committment to winning by putting their wallet where there mouth is and not relying SOLEY on the draft......because of over 10 years of no playoffs....its gonna take some "extra incentive" in order to get quality players to come to Buffalo......so they overpaid. Which article would you rather hear? Nobody will be talking about the money if these guys are still playing come playoff time this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Per Evan Silva of Rotoworld: http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40242 5. Bills defensive end Mark Anderson Seems to have been written before the Demetrius Bell signing. Else this would be #6 on the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAST MODE BABY! Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 To me this is applying a baseball philosphy to football. In baseball, a .320 hitter is a .320 hitter, and will in all likelihood will be that regardless of location or teammates. (Obviously there are exceptions). But with the front the Bills built......investing in Super Mario...spending a high draft pick on Dareus and paying a big money extension to Kyle Williams, the right defensive end is (in theory) going to be facing A LOT of one on one blocking. Prior to the Anderson signing, the Bills didn't currently have a guy on their roster who can consistently win one on one battles, and without that at RDE, you really take a lot of the effectiveness away from the big 3 next to him. So yes, Anderson may not be the guy you want on the field on 3rd and 1, but on 3rd and 7, when Brady drops back and is looking for Welker or Gronkowski, Anderson is going to have one of the most favorable matchups on the field, and he has the ability to exploit that much moreso than Chris Kelsay or Alex Carrington. If Anderson were brought in at 5 million a year to be a bookend to Chris Kelsay, it would be a a lot of money wasted. As is, I think he can flourish in this role. So wait a second, are you saying that Buddy actually has a plan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmy10 Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 (edited) Who cares? It ain't my money. And it's not like we paid him SO much that we severely hindered our ability to bring in anyone else or pay our rookies. Edited April 5, 2012 by jimmyo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Bit of an overpay (And you had to in order to get him here) but I still like the signing. If you look at the deal its not much of a cap hit to cut him after 1 season and after 2 seasons there isn't any cap hit. So at worst we get rid of him in two seasons. Also The Ravens also went after him, that has to show you something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smears Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Meaningless article until we see what he does on the field. Ask me in 3 years if he was overpaid. +1 What the hell does this guy know? People write anything to get their worthless opinions out there. How much does this worthless writer get paid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dollars 2 donuts Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 (edited) Would you guys get really mad at me if I mentioned that when I heard Anderson's deal...I thought it was a little bit too much, as well? Edited April 5, 2012 by dollars 2 donuts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toshiero Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Per Evan Silva of Rotoworld: http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40242 5. Bills defensive end Mark Anderson After re-signing Stevie Johnson, the Bills turned all of their attention to upgrading the front seven, and that aggressiveness was honorable. They made Mario Williams the highest paid defender in NFL history, and then followed it up by signing Anderson to be Mario's weak-side bookend. Buffalo had a plan, and it executed. But Anderson was overpaid in the process, and there are likely people in the Bills' organization who would acknowledge as much. He isn't worth $5 million a year. Anderson is going on age 29. He's been in the league for six seasons, and in just two of them recorded more than five sacks. Anderson is consistently washed out in run defense and is essentially a one-down end. The Bills will give him a chance to be an every-snap player, but it almost certainly won't end well. While Buffalo's team sack total will rise in 2012, offenses will know exactly which front-four member to target on running plays: Mark Anderson. I still like the signing - even if you gotta rotate Kelsay in for run support - and it weakens the enemy at the same time is strengthens us (lot of Pats* fans were upset at losing him). But Evan does have a great point - we'll find out pretty quick if Anderson's a 3-down player or not, because that's definitely where teams are going to try and run at. Rest of the article is also a good read. Overpaid? Only because the Buffalo Bills did it and the national media is scared to death we are going to be prominent again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maybe Someday Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Would you guys get really mad at me if I mentioned that when I heard Anderson's deal...I thought it was a little bit too much, as well? That's it, you're off my Christmas card list!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Would you guys get really mad at me if I mentioned that when I heard Anderson's deal...I thought it was a little bit too much, as well? So not invited to my birthday party Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Best Player Available Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Who cares if we overpaid by 10% or so. He is OURS. You want to talk about overpaid players? How about Sanchez, the Fat Albert deal, etc. and most first round rookie contracts pre 2011. This dude may not be a pro bowler. But if he's now our weakest link on the D-line it's all good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EldaBillsFan Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 He is making 5mil with a reasonable signing bonus......cmon dude...bargain shopping and 29 for a DE isnt washed up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 Anyone on this message board could literally stop what they are doing right now, do 30 minutes of research and write just about any article on Rotoworld. It's the nature of the business. It's one of the reasons many people writing at organizations such as this (I avoid the term 'journalist') get annoyed so much by 'bloggers'. Without the benefit of the 'podium', the job is a lot tougher. The other side of the coin, to be good at it like say, a Coach Sal, requires a lot of work and the pay isn't all that great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts