DougTheBug Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 (edited) Incase jarius Byrd is reading this. Just remember !@#$ that while ur fighting for millions, some family has nothing but a dirt floor. Be grateful u have so many opportunities. Your acting like a selfish piece of ****. If ur not gonna play this season than donate ur time helping the less fortunate, while the rest of us help keep society together. Edited September 22, 2013 by DougTheBug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 ^^^^^^ Okay. Does anyone else have anything they'd like to share with the group? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills44 Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 I alluded to it upthread so I'll just state it here: Byrd was most likely extended the franchise tender by the Bills under the assumption that he was physically able to play football. He signed that tender. If he knew that he was physically unable to play football, then on some level he signed the tender in bad faith. As I said, it's all business and these are all "plays" by the respective sides but on some level, Parker and Byrd were disingenuous, IMO. I concur, SJBF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDBUFFCUSEFAN Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 I alluded to it upthread so I'll just state it here: Byrd was most likely extended the franchise tender by the Bills under the assumption that he was physically able to play football. He signed that tender. If he knew that he was physically unable to play football, then on some level he signed the tender in bad faith. As I said, it's all business and these are all "plays" by the respective sides but on some level, Parker and Byrd were disingenuous, IMO. If Byrd knew his PF was going to prevent him from playing and told the Bills do you think the Bills would have pulled the tag? Byrd only had one option after he was tagged and waited as long as possible to sign the FT. The Bills knew about this issue last season and still chose to tag him, I can see why Byrd would want to wait until he feels 100% since there is so much money on the line. Also a big lol to the people who compare athletes salaries to average people. Millions of people spend money to see athletes play, why do people so often take the side of the billionaire owner over the millionaire player? If you want to make a difference (not that it matters) stop watching, stop buying sports merchandise, and don't go to games. No one forces you to watch sports, it is a choice you make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 If Byrd knew his PF was going to prevent him from playing and told the Bills do you think the Bills would have pulled the tag? No I don't think the Bills would have pulled the tag. As I've said before about this situation, neither side has really done anything wrong. It's just a legal dance and a business situation. That said I stand by my statement that on some level, Byrd and Parker have not been dealing in good faith and I say this in context of my earlier suggestion that if really bad blood existed between the two sides and the Bills ownership/management wanted to become spiteful and contentious that I'm sure the Bills could have their counsel file some sort of complaint with the league claiming that Byrd is not entitled to pay for any weeks that he's unable to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDBUFFCUSEFAN Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 No I don't think the Bills would have pulled the tag. As I've said before about this situation, neither side has really done anything wrong. It's just a legal dance and a business situation. That said I stand by my statement that on some level, Byrd and Parker have not been dealing in good faith and I say this in context of my earlier suggestion that if really bad blood existed between the two sides and the Bills ownership/management wanted to become spiteful and contentious that I'm sure the Bills could have their counsel file some sort of complaint with the league claiming that Byrd is not entitled to pay for any weeks that he's unable to play. Parker is pulling some next level BS which IMO is to get the Bills to not tag Byrd again. I hope Whaley calls his bluff and gives Byrd the FT next season as well, unless a long term deal is worked out, there is no way the Bills should let Parker "win" this battle. Byrd is a pawn in Parkers game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougTheBug Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 If Byrd knew his PF was going to prevent him from playing and told the Bills do you think the Bills would have pulled the tag? Byrd only had one option after he was tagged and waited as long as possible to sign the FT. The Bills knew about this issue last season and still chose to tag him, I can see why Byrd would want to wait until he feels 100% since there is so much money on the line. Also a big lol to the people who compare athletes salaries to average people. Millions of people spend money to see athletes play, why do people so often take the side of the billionaire owner over the millionaire player? If you want to make a difference (not that it matters) stop watching, stop buying sports merchandise, and don't go to games. No one forces you to watch sports, it is a choice you make. I'm not siding with billionaires. A brain surgeon doesnt even make what professional athletes make. Buying merchandise and going to games has nothing to do with it. None of them deserve the absurd money when you have people with an actual job struggle to make it. You need to put everything into context. I like watching football but does a guy need to make 1.4 million dollars in 3 hrs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDBUFFCUSEFAN Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 I'm not siding with billionaires. A brain surgeon doesnt even make what professional athletes make. Buying merchandise and going to games has nothing to do with it. None of them deserve the absurd money when you have people with an actual job struggle to make it. You need to put everything into context. I like watching football but does a guy need to make 1.4 million dollars in 3 hrs? They earn that much because of the revenue the games generate. Where do you think the money should go if not to the players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougTheBug Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 Majority of the money is from television contracts. I think athletes should still get paid good money but half their salaries would be good. The rest of the money should go to schools and funding the infrastructure for each city afterall it's the fans that make the NFL right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDBUFFCUSEFAN Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 Majority of the money is from television contracts. I think athletes should still get paid good money but half their salaries would be good. The rest of the money should go to schools and funding the infrastructure for each city afterall it's the fans that make the NFL right? That isn't how it works in reality though and never will. I don't want to dive into PPP territory so this will be my last post about the economics of sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in STL Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 They earn that much because of the revenue the games generate. Where do you think the money should go if not to the players? The money should indeed go to the players and to the owners, coaches, and front office ... no problem there. At the same time taxpayers should NOT be asked to pay for stadiums or improvements, or PSLs, or any of that crap. Most other businesses pay for their facilities. The dollars we are talking about are insane. Why does it have to cost hundreds of dollars to go to a game? Especially with the TV deals of today. The average fan is priced out and the big markets are running the show. This is a shame and getting worse each year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougTheBug Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 The fact u hear people sharing the same common belief must speak volumes. Btw A guy tilling his farm 20 hrs a day to help feed thousands of people like u won't see 2 percent of what athletes make. All I'm saying is have a little even head about the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDBUFFCUSEFAN Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 The money should indeed go to the players and to the owners, coaches, and front office ... no problem there. At the same time taxpayers should NOT be asked to pay for stadiums or improvements, or PSLs, or any of that crap. Most other businesses pay for their facilities. The dollars we are talking about are insane. Why does it have to cost hundreds of dollars to go to a game? Especially with the TV deals of today. The average fan is priced out and the big markets are running the show. This is a shame and getting worse each year. PSLs and tax-payer funded stadiums are going to take care of themselves. IMO tickets will go down as the at home experience improves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webster Guy Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 Wow. Too many Byrd threads (especially on that other bbmb). I'll just make one post. I love jarius Byrd as a football player. I had hoped we'd make him the highest paid safety and moved on. Apparently obd doesn't feel the same about him. Sucks for me (and some other Byrd fans). As it stands, the situation is ugly. It doesn't look like he'll be a bill for much longer IMO. Best case scenario, he competes to the best of his abilities and helps our D become a formidable unit. Then we pay him. That's probably not going to happen. Byrd is a competitor that wants to win football games. He's a competitor that wants to get paid what he's worth (considering he was a bargain for us for 4 years). We haven't been good for over a decade. He wants to be a part of a winning organization. If we're going to get a hometown price tag, we need to not suck. No reason to take less than what he thinks he's worth.....playing for a crappy team that loses every year. Sure, it would be nice if he just loooooved buffalo and wanted to be a bill for life, even if he has to take less money that what he feels he's worth... but that isn't always going to happen. Playing for a winning organization can really make a difference in an athletes life. He wants to win championships....or be the highest paid safety. I don't hate him or feel the need to bash him for it. I'd probably want the same. He's a great player and wanted to control his own destiny. The franchise tag prevented that. He's not happy about it. I don't blame him. No more Byrd threads please I love it. A guy who claims to know what Byrd is thinking and tells everybody else "no more posts on this." Um.....ok. Personally I couldnt disagree with you more. (Wait is it OK if I post?). I think Parker and Byrd want the biggest payday they can get from whatever team will pay them. Championships are nice, but what team's are you implying that he wants to go to win a title? Steelers? Cowboys? Eagles? Ravens? maybe the Patriots. Yeah they've shown great player loyalty. Byrd has a grand total of 9 picks in the last three years. Even London Fletcher the bowling ball had 5 last year. Jarius is a good free safety with a nagging injury and poor negotiation instincts. Meanwhile spare us your all-knowing definititive posts and dont pretend your thoughts are anything more than your personal opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 So I'll ask again: was Whaley justified in asking for an extension of Byrd's roster exemption? In retrospect, I say yes. GO BILLS!!! That was a TWO WEEK roster exemption, and it expired on August 31st, 2013. Byrd has counted against the 53 man roster since then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 That was a TWO WEEK roster exemption, and it expired on August 31st, 2013. Byrd has counted against the 53 man roster since then. Right, and Whaley asked it to be extended and was denied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 That was a TWO WEEK roster exemption, and it expired on August 31st, 2013. Byrd has counted against the 53 man roster since then. Yes, but it was reported that Whaley had asked the league for an extension into the regular season, which many around here thought was just a punitive measure against Byrd because he wouldn't have been paid for those games. In retrospect, we could have used that spot on a contributing player at another position in the meantime, so I think Whaley was justified in his request. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 Yes. He was justified in doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 The fact u hear people sharing the same common belief must speak volumes. Btw A guy tilling his farm 20 hrs a day to help feed thousands of people like u won't see 2 percent of what athletes make. All I'm saying is have a little even head about the situation. When 70,000 people show up to watch a farmer til his field he will get paid rough that amount Not saying it is right, but thats how economics work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 22, 2013 Share Posted September 22, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts