The Poojer Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 not sure if this has already been posted but here's an article on what the Bills are responsible for for Fitz' contract... http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/17/bills-use-post-june-1-designation-to-minimize-fitzpatrick-cap-hit/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcbillsfan Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 A 20 million dollar mistake. Good thing mr Wilson isn't on charge any longer. Yikes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDIGGZ Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 A 20 million dollar mistake. Good thing mr Wilson isn't on charge any longer. Yikes That's what they want you to think. The truth is Brandon has been running things for years IMO. Their big press conference announcing him now running things was just a marketing ploy. He's been in charge for years and running this team into the ground. I think the Fitz contract was his doing and what a mistake that was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowery4 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 That's what they want you to think. The truth is Brandon has been running things for years IMO. Their big press conference announcing him now running things was just a marketing ploy. He's been in charge for years and running this team into the ground. I think the Fitz contract was his doing and what a mistake that was A link for you http://ananael.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-truth-about-tinfoil-hats.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDIGGZ Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 A link for you http://ananael.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-truth-about-tinfoil-hats.html I've had my tinfoil hat on for years homie. The truth is out there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 What goes unsaid in the release of Fitz, is that the trade with Seattle for our current "starter" Tavaris Jackson, cost us our 6th round pick this year. They weren't getting the pick back, but they could recoup some cash and spread the cap hit over two years by designating Fitz a June 1 cut. So, come June 1st we'll have another $4.25 to spend on FAs. That nearly enough cash to sign the entire squad of our 2013 rookies. Bottom line - just like his play - it wasn't very pretty, but it was the only logical move they could make based on the corner they'd painted themselves into. On another note, in a lot of articles I've seen, Fitz is rated the #1 QB FA at this point in time. Not saying he's a #1 QB, but he's valued more highly as a #2 than anybody else available out there right now. I think you could add The Bills to that group of evaluators as well. Go Bills! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 It was the best option they had available to them to still pick up more players. As far as Brandon, I agree although Wilson botched a lot of decisions this last decade. I think a lot is going to happen in the coming months which is why I'm not freaking out. There will be plenty of time to throw pretzels at the TV come September, where I'll hopelessly want them to win, and by October be ready for the draft again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted March 17, 2013 Author Share Posted March 17, 2013 Thanks for that analysis! What goes unsaid in the release of Fitz, is that the trade with Seattle for our current "starter" Tavaris Jackson, cost us our 6th round pick this year. They weren't getting the pick back, but they could recoup some cash and spread the cap hit over two years by designating Fitz a June 1 cut. So, come June 1st we'll have another $4.25 to spend on FAs. That nearly enough cash to sign the entire squad of our 2013 rookies. Bottom line - just like his play - it wasn't very pretty, but it was the only logical move they could make based on the corner they'd painted themselves into. On another note, in a lot of articles I've seen, Fitz is rated the #1 QB FA at this point in time. Not saying he's a #1 QB, but he's valued more highly as a #2 than anybody else available out there right now. I think you could add The Bills to that group of evaluators as well. Go Bills! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 A link for you http://ananael.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-truth-about-tinfoil-hats.html He may have gotten a bit enthusiastic in his idea, but I don't think it's crazy to say Russ has been the on site number 1 guy in buffalo for day today, and that Ralph likely relied on his input heavily for how to handle decisions that escalated to him. If he would've just left it as "I doubt the press conference really changed that much" he likely wouldn't have been tooooo far from the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris heff Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 What goes unsaid in the release of Fitz, is that the trade with Seattle for our current "starter" Tavaris Jackson, cost us our 6th round pick this year. They weren't getting the pick back, but they could recoup some cash and spread the cap hit over two years by designating Fitz a June 1 cut. So, come June 1st we'll have another $4.25 to spend on FAs. That nearly enough cash to sign the entire squad of our 2013 rookies. Bottom line - just like his play - it wasn't very pretty, but it was the only logical move they could make based on the corner they'd painted themselves into. On another note, in a lot of articles I've seen, Fitz is rated the #1 QB FA at this point in time. Not saying he's a #1 QB, but he's valued more highly as a #2 than anybody else available out there right now. I think you could add The Bills to that group of evaluators as well. Go Bills! I think that because Jackson never dressed last year the Bills only give up a seventh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAWNDO Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) What goes unsaid in the release of Fitz, is that the trade with Seattle for our current "starter" Tavaris Jackson, cost us our 6th round pick this year. They weren't getting the pick back, but they could recoup some cash and spread the cap hit over two years by designating Fitz a June 1 cut. So, come June 1st we'll have another $4.25 to spend on FAs. That nearly enough cash to sign the entire squad of our 2013 rookies. Bottom line - just like his play - it wasn't very pretty, but it was the only logical move they could make based on the corner they'd painted themselves into. On another note, in a lot of articles I've seen, Fitz is rated the #1 QB FA at this point in time. Not saying he's a #1 QB, but he's valued more highly as a #2 than anybody else available out there right now. I think you could add The Bills to that group of evaluators as well. Go Bills! The sad part if the Bills would have agreed keep the roster bonus of 3 million he probably would have taken a large pay cut and agreed to be the backup. Edited March 17, 2013 by BRAWNDO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) The sad part if the Bills would have agreed keep the roster bonus of 3 million he probably would have taken a large pay cut and agreed to be the backup. It was quoted somewhere recently that he was NOT willing to restucture. Sorry no link , but that sticks in my mind strongly. The FO was trying to do something to save some cash before the 3 million dollar day. That statement soon after his release changed my view about this mess. Bills have admitted mistake and shown that with these actions , for what i consider the best interest of the team. It was going to be painful regardless of how it fell out. Edited March 17, 2013 by 3rdand12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 fitz told murph he was willing to restructure just not at the rate the bills offered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 fitz told murph he was willing to restructure just not at the rate the bills offered That was it ! Thanks. No details have i heard though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAWNDO Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 It was quoted somewhere recently that he was NOT willing to restucture. Sorry no link , but that sticks in my mind strongly. The FO was trying to do something to save some cash before the 3 million dollar day. That statement soon after his release changed my view about this mess. Bills have admitted mistake and shown that with these actions , for what i consider the best interest of the team. It was going to be painful regardless of how it fell out. The roster bonus was the key, he did not want to be cut during or after training camp and not have a team to play for in 2013. He realized that the Bills could not guarantee a roster spot and he would be better off signing somewhere else to be on a team next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 I think that because Jackson never dressed last year the Bills only give up a seventh. You are correct sir, and that also played into TJ riding the pine for the entire season. The sad part if the Bills would have agreed keep the roster bonus of 3 million he probably would have taken a large pay cut and agreed to be the backup. Others have responded already, and I don't doubt he would have restructured a bit. But me thinks the $3million was entirely - or thereabouts what they wanted to pay him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) What goes unsaid in the release of Fitz, is that the trade with Seattle for our current "starter" Tavaris Jackson, cost us our 6th round pick this year. They weren't getting the pick back, but they could recoup some cash and spread the cap hit over two years by designating Fitz a June 1 cut. So, come June 1st we'll have another $4.25 to spend on FAs. That nearly enough cash to sign the entire squad of our 2013 rookies. Bottom line - just like his play - it wasn't very pretty, but it was the only logical move they could make based on the corner they'd painted themselves into. On another note, in a lot of articles I've seen, Fitz is rated the #1 QB FA at this point in time. Not saying he's a #1 QB, but he's valued more highly as a #2 than anybody else available out there right now. I think you could add The Bills to that group of evaluators as well. Go Bills! Good points all. When all the angst about not performing to expectations is stripped off, paying Fitz $21 million plus his 2010 salary means Fitz was our starter for ~3 years at ~$7-8 million a year. Does anyone have a link to the complete list of NFL QB salaries during that timeframe? That's certainly not "top 10" QB money. I expect he was being paid in the mid-tier range overall, which is exactly what he is as a QB and exactly where our offense performed. The Bills gave up nothing to get him - he was signed as a FA Compare and contrast with AZ, which gave up DRC and a high 2nd round pick for the chance to sign Kevin Kolb to a 6 year, $65 million dollar contract of which if I'm right, they paid him $20 million and received less than a full season of games (15 games over 2 years) for a level of play (when he was able to play) on an approximate par. Relative to other deals (Cutler for Orton?), the Bills didn't get horridly fleeced, and in moving on, they made the best decision they could make about when to cut him to minimize the cap hit impact. They took a gamble they were getting a bargain if Fitz played up to his 2011 early-season level, and they lost on that gamble, leaving them paying approximately mid-tier QB market price for a durable mid-tier QB. Edited March 17, 2013 by Hopeful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Jerry Sullivan said give him more. I do not understand what the benefit was for TJax still. Yes, put him on the pine to move a 6th to a 7th but what did Gailey and staff think of it? You know at some point it was **** hit the fan mode and it had to have been Nix denying them a chance to put TJax in - at which point Gailey probably gave up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) It was quoted somewhere recently that he was NOT willing to restucture. Sorry no link , but that sticks in my mind strongly. He's been quoted as saying he was willing to restructure but not according to the deal the Bills offered, and that the Bills weren't willing to negotiate so they were never close. The Buffalo Evening News reported "The Bills offered Fitzpatrick a new, four-year deal that averaged $3 million a year, with an opportunity to make $4 million a year more each year in incentives, according to a source close to the talks. It was not clear what Fitzpatrick would have had to do to reach those incentives." In his radio interview with Murphy, Fitz refused to discuss numbers but implied the numbers in the media weren't accurate (or the like). "Averaging $3 million a year for 4 years" could mean $1 million this year, $2 million next year, $3.5 million in the 3rd year, $5.5 million in the 4th year with no guaranteed money. Fitz could be looking at what Garrard got as a guy who hasn't taken a snap in 2 years and had similar stats in 2010, and what Moore got as a potential backup in MIA and saying "I think my market value is higher even as a backup" Edited March 17, 2013 by Hopeful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Best Player Available Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Jerry Sullivan said give him more. I do not understand what the benefit was for TJax still. Yes, put him on the pine to move a 6th to a 7th but what did Gailey and staff think of it? You know at some point it was **** hit the fan mode and it had to have been Nix denying them a chance to put TJax in - at which point Gailey probably gave up. Disagree. Why would Nix get his panty's in a bunch over a 6th. It's not like he's ever hit on that pick. With the Bills any player making the roster past pick 4 is a bonus. Even then most are what we qualify as "good"depth players. Other teams get full blown starters.I blame Nix for that. Of course they do seem adept at hitting on a occasional UDFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts