Bill from NYC Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 that TD has his eye on one particular VERY expensive free agent. He wants Moulds and Drew to accept pay cuts. A poster stated that Priouleaux is slated to earn 1.5 mil. We will pick up approx. 1.2 mil for dumping Henry. Josh Reed is all but sure to be dumped. I am sure there will be others, and we are already under the cap! The above adds up to a lot of cap space. Might we see another "Takeo type" signing? A big name/huge impact player? Pace? Jones? Thomas? One could only hope, but imo, TD has already plotted a course. We shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 time will tell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 What IS interesting, I think, is that we don't have a particular person on the radar right now like we did with Spikes. Any signing of that size would catch most all of us by surprise, which would be good. Cuz we haven't had anything to truly B word about in over a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 that TD has his eye on one particular VERY expensive free agent. He wants Moulds and Drew to accept pay cuts. A poster stated that Priouleaux is slated to earn 1.5 mil. We will pick up approx. 1.2 mil for dumping Henry. Josh Reed is all but sure to be dumped. I am sure there will be others, and we are already under the cap! The above adds up to a lot of cap space. Might we see another "Takeo type" signing? A big name/huge impact player? Pace? Jones? Thomas? One could only hope, but imo, TD has already plotted a course. We shall see. 211554[/snapback] Have we learned NOTHING from the Pats. One big signing doesn't get it done. The only big name that the Pats have signed from outside in the last four years has been Colvin. Hurt all of last year, never hear his name this year, but, and this is the key, you DO NOT hear him whinig about PT and demanding to be traded!(th) We do not need one big name, we need TEAM players at several postitions, guys who have a burning desire to win at all costs. I am convinced that is why the Pats dusted the Colts, to many friggin big name, big contract guys who have lost thier hatred of losing among all the big money. Okay, done with my rant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted January 19, 2005 Author Share Posted January 19, 2005 Have we learned NOTHING from the Pats. One big signing doesn't get it done. The only big name that the Pats have signed from outside in the last four years has been Colvin. Hurt all of last year, never hear his name this year, but, and this is the key, you DO NOT hear him whinig about PT and demanding to be traded!(th) We do not need one big name, we need TEAM players at several postitions, guys who have a burning desire to win at all costs. I am convinced that is why the Pats dusted the Colts, to many friggin big name, big contract guys who have lost thier hatred of losing among all the big money. Okay, done with my rant. 211569[/snapback] Rant? That was a very good post! I counter it with the contention that Pace and Ogden led their teams to superbowls. It CAN work either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 that TD has his eye on one particular VERY expensive free agent. He wants Moulds and Drew to accept pay cuts. A poster stated that Priouleaux is slated to earn 1.5 mil. We will pick up approx. 1.2 mil for dumping Henry. Josh Reed is all but sure to be dumped. I am sure there will be others, and we are already under the cap! The above adds up to a lot of cap space. Might we see another "Takeo type" signing? A big name/huge impact player? Pace? Jones? Thomas? One could only hope, but imo, TD has already plotted a course. We shall see. 211554[/snapback] the report regarding drew has not been backed up by TD -- it could very well be false or even a bluff........ the bills are working to EXTEND moulds.......they have not asked him to take a pay cut....... i stated that prioleau's cap savings would be 1.5 million........he is making 1 million in salary, his cap hit is 1.75, and his dead money if cut before june 1 is 250K........ i think it is way to early to cut reed and i can't see it happening....... hopefully there is some money earmarked to extend nate this off-season - letting him play out 2005 under his rookie deal would be a HUGE mistake........TD needs to cough up cash this off-season....... there is no doubt there will be money to spend -- just a matter of whether 'tight ass' TD is willing to spend the bucks or not........he could have spent more last off-season and didn't, and i wouldn't be surprised if he took the cheap route again....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 i agree we need to extend clements...if hes willing...with all the big money being thrown around, he may not want to re-up, but test the free agency waters...not to diss him but he strikes me as that type of guy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted January 19, 2005 Author Share Posted January 19, 2005 the report regarding drew has not been backed up by TD -- it could very well be false or even a bluff........ the bills are working to EXTEND moulds.......they have not asked him to take a pay cut....... i stated that prioleau's cap savings would be 1.5 million........he is making 1 million in salary, his cap hit is 1.75, and his dead money if cut before june 1 is 250K........ i think it is way to early to cut reed and i can't see it happening....... hopefully there is some money earmarked to extend nate this off-season - letting him play out 2005 under his rookie deal would be a HUGE mistake........TD needs to cough up cash this off-season....... there is no doubt there will be money to spend -- just a matter of whether 'tight ass' TD is willing to spend the bucks or not........he could have spent more last off-season and didn't, and i wouldn't be surprised if he took the cheap route again....... 211584[/snapback] Any contract workings with Moulds will certainly involve cap relief for the Bills. He is slated to count more than 8 million dollars next season, and that will never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Any contract workings with Moulds will certainly involve cap relief for the Bills. He is slated to count more than 8 million dollars next season, and that will never happen. 211595[/snapback] of course, his cap hit will certainly go down, but it has nothing to do with a pay cut.......there is zero chance moulds would accept a pay cut (he would love to get cut and hit free agency) and zero chance the bills would ask him to take one (what would be the point?)........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snorom Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 there is no doubt there will be money to spend -- just a matter of whether 'tight ass' TD is willing to spend the bucks or not........he could have spent more last off-season and didn't, and i wouldn't be surprised if he took the cheap route again....... 211584[/snapback] The Bills have spent money every year TD has been here minus his 1st season when we purged the roster. Each year we have been just under the cap limit. Please explain to me how TD has taken the cheap route ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 The Bills have spent money every year TD has been here minus his 1st season when we purged the roster. Each year we have been just under the cap limit. Please explain to me how TD has taken the cheap route ? 211600[/snapback] exactly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 There could be something more to this, but I would be willing to accept that TD is doing whatever possible to make enough cap room to re-sign Phat Pat and Jonas at the same time. Although TD is a big bluff artist, I don't doubt his repeated contentions that he is most concerned with keeping his own guys rather than going out and buying them from FA. It'll take some big bucks to keep those two (plus Clements) here, so if there is cap room to be had, he'll find it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 The Bills have spent money every year TD has been here minus his 1st season when we purged the roster. Each year we have been just under the cap limit. Please explain to me how TD has taken the cheap route ? 211600[/snapback] sure, for example: pete kendall became available just before the 2004 season.......he would have been PERFECT as our starting LG in 2004.......TD, being cheap, didn't look at him and didn't sign him even though we had the room to sign him and the need was there........instead he went to our division rival and had a fantastic season, being named as a all-pro by several publications.....the bills, on the other hand, struggled at the LG position early in the year with castoff laurence smith manning the spot, until tucker stepped in and played well, but not nearly to kendall's level....... IMO, if TD wasn't cheap and filled the LG position last off-season we make the playoffs in 2004.......instead he didn't spend the bucks and put to much faith in mcnally, and we paid for it....... that is one example but there are others.........i just hope he spends some cash this off-season and takes this team over the hump......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 sure, for example: pete kendall became available just before the 2004 season.......he would have been PERFECT as our starting LG in 2004.......TD, being cheap, didn't look at him and didn't sign him even though we had the room to sign him and the need was there........instead he went to our division rival and had a fantastic season, being named as a all-pro by several publications.....the bills, on the other hand, struggled at the LG position early in the year with castoff laurence smith manning the spot, until tucker stepped in and played well, but not nearly to kendall's level....... IMO, if TD wasn't cheap and filled the LG position last off-season we make the playoffs in 2004.......instead he didn't spend the bucks and put to much faith in mcnally, and we paid for it....... that is one example but there are others.........i just hope he spends some cash this off-season and takes this team over the hump......... 211613[/snapback] Pete Kendall was evaluated by our staff (namely McNally, not ony TD) and was determined to be too small and for our system/scheme. He was suggested and, in effect, denied as a prospect. The issue was not $ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 sure, for example: pete kendall became available just before the 2004 season.......he would have been PERFECT as our starting LG in 2004.......TD, being cheap, didn't look at him and didn't sign him even though we had the room to sign him and the need was there........instead he went to our division rival and had a fantastic season, being named as a all-pro by several publications.....the bills, on the other hand, struggled at the LG position early in the year with castoff laurence smith manning the spot, until tucker stepped in and played well, but not nearly to kendall's level....... IMO, if TD wasn't cheap and filled the LG position last off-season we make the playoffs in 2004.......instead he didn't spend the bucks and put to much faith in mcnally, and we paid for it....... that is one example but there are others.........i just hope he spends some cash this off-season and takes this team over the hump......... 211613[/snapback] Agree on the Kendall thing, but I don't think they didn't look at him for cap reasons, but I think these guys, outside of a notable few(Belicheck,Reid) are scared to bring in someone who has just been cut or is considered to be a problem child. Remember, the prevailing thought was that he was not buying into Dennys system, and nobody wants a problem child on their team. As I said in my earlier post, I tend to agree with that. This dude was cut right at the beginning of training camp by the Cards for christs sake. THE STINKIN CARDS cut him, gotta be a loser. However, when a strong team ethic prevails, these problem children seem to fall in line ,ala TO and Dillon. Guess I am just envious of teams like the Pats and Eagles that seem to know when to let go of the BIG Name guys like Milloy, Douglas, Trotter, Woody when they are at the peak of earning power, but on the downward side of their playmaking ability, and can bring in guys that hate to lose more than they love to make money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted January 19, 2005 Author Share Posted January 19, 2005 Agree on the Kendall thing, but I don't think they didn't look at him for cap reasons, but I think these guys, outside of a notable few(Belicheck,Reid) are scared to bring in someone who has just been cut or is considered to be a problem child. Remember, the prevailing thought was that he was not buying into Dennys system, and nobody wants a problem child on their team. As I said in my earlier post, I tend to agree with that. This dude was cut right at the beginning of training camp by the Cards for christs sake. THE STINKIN CARDS cut him, gotta be a loser. However, when a strong team ethic prevails, these problem children seem to fall in line ,ala TO and Dillon. Guess I am just envious of teams like the Pats and Eagles that seem to know when to let go of the BIG Name guys like Milloy, Douglas, Trotter, Woody when they are at the peak of earning power, but on the downward side of their playmaking ability, and can bring in guys that hate to lose more than they love to make money. 211634[/snapback] Big name signings can also work, ala Paup, Speilman, Kearse, Takeo, and more. Btw, please post more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Pete Kendall was evaluated by our staff (namely McNally, not ony TD) and was determined to be too small and for our system/scheme. He was suggested and, in effect, denied as a prospect. The issue was not $ 211633[/snapback] well that is a huge blunder on TD's part, no? obviously he would have helped the team.......obviously we had a need there........obviously it would have been a solid move.......so if it wasn't about money, why didn't he get him in here? attitude? he didn't seem to cause any problems in NY, so i guess TD misjudged that as well........ i think it was about money, plain and simple........TD didn't want to pay the bucks and wanted to get by with "bargain bin " talent......jets, on the other hand, weren't afraid to spend and reaped the rewards (i.e. playoffs)....... it's amazing how people will defend EVERYTHING donahoe does......i like the guy, he's a good GM, but he's not perfect, and in this case he screwed up.......he over-estimated our OL, and we paid for it........another solid guard and we are in the playoffs, but TD miscalculated.......... it's okay to admit it - it doesn't make you a "bad" bills fan to call out the GM for a bad move......but hey, if you want to be a sheep, be my guest........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted January 19, 2005 Author Share Posted January 19, 2005 d wag...Kendall was said to be very small. This even scared me after watching Ruben, who probably weighed around 270, getting pushed around. That said, Kendall had a good year, but imo it was a tough call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Big name signings can also work, ala Paup, Speilman, Kearse, Takeo, and more. Btw, please post more often. 211643[/snapback] paup wasn't exactly a big signing when we brought him in. he was a vet free agent LB who turned around and had a big season (defensive player of the year) due in large part to bruce smith (the following season's DPOTY) his big payday came when he left buffalo for jacksonville, where he faded into obscurity due in part to injury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 d wag...Kendall was said to be very small. This even scared me after watching Ruben, who probably weighed around 270, getting pushed around. That said, Kendall had a good year, but imo it was a tough call. 211646[/snapback] you can label it a tough call if you want (i call it a slam dunk -- he's a former all-pro and his play this year was hardly surprising to me), but anyway you spin it you still have a BAD MOVE by TD........we had a need, he could have filled that need, and he didn't even bring him in for a workout.......like i said, he over-estimated the LG position and it cost us big time........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 well that is a huge blunder on TD's part, no? obviously he would have helped the team.......obviously we had a need there........obviously it would have been a solid move.......so if it wasn't about money, why didn't he get him in here? attitude? he didn't seem to cause any problems in NY, so i guess TD misjudged that as well........ i think it was about money, plain and simple........TD didn't want to pay the bucks and wanted to get by with "bargain bin " talent......jets, on the other hand, weren't afraid to spend and reaped the rewards (i.e. playoffs)....... it's amazing how people will defend EVERYTHING donahoe does......i like the guy, he's a good GM, but he's not perfect, and in this case he screwed up.......he over-estimated our OL, and we paid for it........another solid guard and we are in the playoffs, but TD miscalculated.......... it's okay to admit it - it doesn't make you a "bad" bills fan to call out the GM for a bad move......but hey, if you want to be a sheep, be my guest........ 211645[/snapback] No sheep here, just a fan that was trying to help this thread along by reporting the FACTS (as stated at the time by the team) about why they did not sign the man. What about my statement was "sheep" to you? Just because Kendall played well for the Jets doesn't mean he would have in our scheme.... And Yes I agree we need the guard (left) position upgraded... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted January 19, 2005 Author Share Posted January 19, 2005 paup wasn't exactly a big signing when we brought him in. he was a vet free agent LB who turned around and had a big season (defensive player of the year) due in large part to bruce smith (the following season's DPOTY) his big payday came when he left buffalo for jacksonville, where he faded into obscurity due in part to injury 211647[/snapback] Well, as I recall, he got 7.6 mil for 3 years. This was a big contract back then when taking into consideration that he was something of a situational player at GB. Bro, do you remember how great he was before the groin injury?! He was NFL Defensive Player of the Year, and well deserved. He was smart, fierce, strong, and had those long arms! Imagine Takeo, Fletcher and Paup! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark VI Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Adam Viniteri ! TD has finally come to his senses ! I just don't see us signing an OL to a big $$ contract. A Chris V. type, yes. R. Rich mentioned OT Tra Thomas of Philly, which isn't a bad idea at all, if he doesn't draw a bidding war. Guys like Pace, Jones, even Jennings will cost too much. Signing another Guard would also be wise. Solid TE's like the Rams Cam Cleeland or Anthony Becht of the Jets. A CB like Aaron Beasley of Atlanta or Renaldo Hill of the Cards. There is always a good group of Vet WR's to find a good #3 from. A backup RB. Re-signing Marcus Price and Pat Williams is also realistic. This what TD will shop for in March. I don't expect any big name FA signing at all. Doesn't mean we can't improve our team the right way. Then the draft can be used for some devlopmental talent, instead of using Rookies to plug holes. A solid March could mean the Bills could gamble on a Mike Nugent to upgrade our Kicking game. That WOULD make an impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Cuz we haven't had anything to truly B word about in over a week. 211561[/snapback] You usually find something, though, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 No sheep here, just a fan that was trying to help this thread along by reporting the FACTS (as stated at the time by the team) about why they did not sign the man. What about my statement was "sheep" to you? Just because Kendall played well for the Jets doesn't mean he would have in our scheme.... And Yes I agree we need the guard (left) position upgraded... 211654[/snapback] i referred to you as a sheep because i think your making excuses and i'm not buying any of them -- kendall would have helped this team ALOT and would have solidified the middle of the line........he should have been brought in for a look and an attempt should have been made to sign him........TD didn't even have him in for a workout...... i think kendall would have fit in to our "scheme" just fine......he played well in SEA, he played well in ARZ, and he played well in NY -- three different schemes, same result........ left guard was a need last off-season, and it's STILL a need this off-season........with kendall here, it would solved a long time ago and we would have had more wins to show for it........he's better then smith and tucker, plain and simple, and it's a shame we didn't have him last year.......and the man responsible for that decision is TD......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRW Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Have we learned NOTHING from the Pats. One big signing doesn't get it done. The only big name that the Pats have signed from outside in the last four years has been Colvin. Hurt all of last year, never hear his name this year, but, and this is the key, you DO NOT hear him whinig about PT and demanding to be traded!(th) We do not need one big name, we need TEAM players at several postitions, guys who have a burning desire to win at all costs. I am convinced that is why the Pats dusted the Colts, to many friggin big name, big contract guys who have lost thier hatred of losing among all the big money. Okay, done with my rant. 211569[/snapback] While that is true, I think a coach like Belichick has proven to be a rare commodity. If they can afford to do so, the Bills need to bring in more talent. The Patriots' methods really seem to work because they have a coach, and a staff as a whole, that is a cut above the rest. If we don't have that (and I'm not putting Mularkey down here, just saying it's not something to count on) getting players who can be difference makers is the best way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 i referred to you as a sheep because i think your making excuses and i'm not buying any of them -- kendall would have helped this team ALOT and would have solidified the middle of the line........he should have been brought in for a look and an attempt should have been made to sign him........TD didn't even have him in for a workout...... i think kendall would have fit in to our "scheme" just fine......he played well in SEA, he played well in ARZ, and he played well in NY -- three different schemes, same result........ left guard was a need last off-season, and it's STILL a need this off-season........with kendall here, it would solved a long time ago and we would have had more wins to show for it........he's better then smith and tucker, plain and simple, and it's a shame we didn't have him last year.......and the man responsible for that decision is TD......... 211767[/snapback] Oh I see, I'm making excuses based on facts reported from the Bills organization AND I should know that you are more knowledgeable than McNally, Mularkey, Clements, TD, etc. when it comes to evaluating our scheme. Not one ounce of what I posted was an excuse, it's what actually happened. Go ahead and make a fool of yourself if you wish. ... btw it is already obvious that we need to better the RG position, within our scheme. Atleast you got that right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 i referred to you as a sheep because i think your making excuses and i'm not buying any of them -- kendall would have helped this team ALOT and would have solidified the middle of the line........he should have been brought in for a look and an attempt should have been made to sign him........TD didn't even have him in for a workout...... i think kendall would have fit in to our "scheme" just fine......he played well in SEA, he played well in ARZ, and he played well in NY -- three different schemes, same result........ left guard was a need last off-season, and it's STILL a need this off-season........with kendall here, it would solved a long time ago and we would have had more wins to show for it........he's better then smith and tucker, plain and simple, and it's a shame we didn't have him last year.......and the man responsible for that decision is TD......... 211767[/snapback] There are two issues here, 1: Should TDF and the braintrust have invested in Kendall and by committing bucks to an LG instead of the decisions they made won the one more game necesary to make the playoffs at least, and 2. did they not do this because TD is a tightwad. I think your first point may be true and is a good football debate. I think your second point is not true as with the players' salary now set by the salary cap and the Bills having pretty consistently spent within spitting distace of the max they could spend on players salaries and clearly did not have enough money left over in cap room to have bought Kendall that cheapness is not the issue here at all. Perhaps once could try to make the case that though the Bills pretty much maxed out in current cap expenditures they have not taken money from the future to get alent in the present by paying bonuses now and prorating them over the long-term as bonus. This argument can be factually made, but its a pretty tough sale as a good strategy after living through the cap hell ofthe Butler moves along this line and watching the 9ers spin in the toilet still after pursuing this strategy. Beside even if you disagree with how TD has managed his maxing out of the cap by not spending future money, I think it stretches reality to label someone as cheap for not doing this. TD has made a number of bad football mistakes with clear contract implications: 1. Extending JH and HJ contracts and then cutting them only to see Raion Hill not do the job (bad football judgment) and Cowart get hurt (bad luck). 2. Saying good kickers are a dime-a-dozen and cutting Christie and then presiding over the Ariens, Graham, Hollis, and Lindell near misses and debacles. 3, Hiring GW and then not being controlling enough to force him to hire a more experienced coaching staff and controlling Kevin Killdrive. He apparently advocated for Clements but gave in to GW's choice of Gilbride 4. Buying the judgments of GW and Gray that Jenkins and Robinson were answers for us. 5. Glidon and various other flyers like Farris, the DE whose name I forget and a player here or there (Glidon really is the only one who vexes me as his deadspace was signnificant. I'm sure there are other issues which do not leap to mind at this semi-late hour. However, there is just as good an argument here that he has been to profligate spending Ralph's money on these bad ideas as to somehow call him a skin flint. Also, a rational view has to take into consideration of some excellent financial moves and risky expenditures that he has made like McGahee, the Sam Adams contract, spending the bucks to get Spikes here, a nice pick-up and significant expenditure on Fletcher, and even though folks disagree on spending money on Bledsoe the problem here in most people's minds was that he should have been a tightwad and not spent this money. If you got a problem with his LG judgments I think you're much more credible complaing about that than complaining he is a tightwad. If you feel his Kendall choice was a financial issue then I think you're far closer in your professional mind-reading which reveals his money issues by complaining he spent too much money on Bledsoe and instead he should have spent too much money on Kendall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njsue Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Hope its offensive line help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Oh I see, I'm making excuses based on facts reported from the Bills organization AND I should know that you are more knowledgeable than McNally, Mularkey, Clements, TD, etc. when it comes to evaluating our scheme. Not one ounce of what I posted was an excuse, it's what actually happened. Go ahead and make a fool of yourself if you wish. ... btw it is already obvious that we need to better the RG position, within our scheme. Atleast you got that right. 211912[/snapback] do you take everything TD says at face value? yea, and i'm the fool.......haha it was TD's excuse because he didn't want to commit the long-term bucks to kendall.......he made a mistake as kendall obviously would have been a good sign....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob4Bills Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 The only big name that the Pats have signed from outside in the last four years has been Colvin. Okay, done with my rant. 211569[/snapback] Cory Dillon??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 There are two issues here, 1: Should TDF and the braintrust have invested in Kendall and by committing bucks to an LG instead of the decisions they made won the one more game necesary to make the playoffs at least, and 2. did they not do this because TD is a tightwad. I think your first point may be true and is a good football debate. I think your second point is not true as with the players' salary now set by the salary cap and the Bills having pretty consistently spent within spitting distace of the max they could spend on players salaries and clearly did not have enough money left over in cap room to have bought Kendall that cheapness is not the issue here at all. 211998[/snapback] the bills didn't have 660K in cap room? that was his 2004 cap hit......... TD did not want to commit to the future years of that deal, hence why i call him cheap........but you can't say he didn't have room to do it because 660K is nothing........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Cory Dillon??? 212015[/snapback] Not a FA signing, that was a trade. And he has a manageable cap number Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 One of the offensive line gurus please respond... Pace got his stojan kicked in several games this year. Schobel had his best game of the year against Pace, and Atlanta ate him up to name a couple. Has he lost some of his dominance or do players just get up when facing him? Pace's troubles this year make me lean heavily towards Jones, I think he escapes the franchise tag this year. If TD makes a big splash this year that's the way I would go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 do you take everything TD says at face value? yea, and i'm the fool.......haha it was TD's excuse because he didn't want to commit the long-term bucks to kendall.......he made a mistake as kendall obviously would have been a good sign....... 212014[/snapback] It was not TD's "excuse". It was verified by MM and he mentioned that the "coaches" evaluated the situation. Muyst be nice in your nifty world where every thing that happens filters uphill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 While that is true, I think a coach like Belichick has proven to be a rare commodity. If they can afford to do so, the Bills need to bring in more talent. The Patriots' methods really seem to work because they have a coach, and a staff as a whole, that is a cut above the rest. If we don't have that (and I'm not putting Mularkey down here, just saying it's not something to count on) getting players who can be difference makers is the best way to go. 211805[/snapback] MRW. i agree whole heartledly(speeling) with your post. I also find it somewhat amazing that of the 4 teams left, three caoches who have almost total control. Conventional wisdom says one needs a strong GM and coach, not one doing both jobs, and I tend to agree with that. However, these teams seem to defy that logic. The real kicker is that the Pats and the Eagles, the two most consistant teams over the last four years, seem to never have any cap issues. I may be wrong, but I think the Eagles are like $20M under the cap for next year and have a plethora of picks. I guess that was my original point, that I am more convinced that ever that football is the ultimate team game, and overpaying for one or two players just guts your team. Reid and Belichek seem better than others at spotting talant early in their career, and locking them up early. How often have you seen a Pat or Eagle worth a big contract come up for FA in yr 4 or 5. I am sure there are examples, but overall they restructure those rookie contracts in the 2nd or third year, tying the guy up until he is in his late 20's and , like I said, in peak EARNING years, not peak playing years. I believe Philly redid both of their starting cornerbacks this year in mid year, while the players were only in the 2nd year of 4 yr deals. Now, that is what I want to see out of TD I want to see TD start locking down guys like McGee and WM now, not wait till their contract year. If we need to cut some vetereans to get this done , so be it. Tell ya this, we better be drafting some safetys, as those boys back there are getting old. I know, I know, they played great down the stretch, but thats where a GREAT gm comes in. Remeber those guys were CUT by the two teams favored to go the Bowl, and they seem to be doing just fine without them. I am not sure when Mike Williams is a FA, I am guessing after 2006. Why not look at tying him up now, before he continues to mature and continues to get better as he did this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted January 20, 2005 Author Share Posted January 20, 2005 MRW. i agree whole heartledly(speeling) with your post. I also find it somewhat amazing that of the 4 teams left, three caoches who have almost total control. Conventionalwisdom says one needs a strong GM and coach, not one doing both jobs, and I tend to agree with that. However, these teams seem to defy that logic. The real kicker is that the Pats and the Eagles, the two most consistant teams over the last four years, seem to never have any cap issues. I may be wrong, but I think the Eagles are like $20M under the cap for next year and have a plethora of picks. I guess that was my original point, that I am more convinced that ever that football is the ultimate team game, and overpaying for one or two players just guts your team. Reid and Belichek seem better than others at spotting talant early in their career, and locking them up early. How often have you seen a Pat or Eagle worth a big contract come up for FA in yr 4 or 5. I am sure there are examples, but overall they restructure those rookie contracts in the 2nd or third year, tying the guy up until he is in his late 20's and , like I said, in peak EARNING years, not peak playing years. I believe Philly redid both of their starting cornerbacks this year in mid year, while the players were only in the 2nd year of 4 yr deals. Now, that is what I want to see out of TD I want to see TD start locking down guys like McGee and WM now, not wait till their contract year. If we need to cut some vetereans to get this done , so be it. Tell ya this, we better be drafting some safetys, as those boys back there are getting old. I know, I know, they played great down the stretch, but thats where a GREAT gm comes in. Remeber those guys were CUT by the two teams favored to go the Bowl, and they seem to be doing just fine without them. I am not sure when Mike Williams is a FA, I am guessing after 2006. Why not look at tying him up now, before he continues to mature and continues to get better as he did this year. 212189[/snapback] Another good post! I think that part of what happened on the Bills was due to the mess that TD inherited. Other than Moulds, I am hard pressed to recall much if any real talent on that team. To make matters worse, it cost as I recall nearly 11 million dollars in dead cap space to rid the team of Fina and Ostroski, two virtual if not in fact scrubs. Sam Rogers was being paid 3 mil per season. It was a mess. It IS frustrating to watch NE. Vrabel, a good but not great player looks like a pro bowler in that system, as does Bruschi. With the Bills, I agree that it is time to look for safeties, a position at which we are aging. Also, imo there is never a bad time to stock up on big ugly men who can block. To his credit, TD HAS brought in some young defensive linemen. In short, I guess this philosophy comes down to whether or not one believes that the Bills are only a few players away from big things. I happen to think that they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkwwjd Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Cuz we haven't had anything to truly B word about in over a week. 211561[/snapback] That's cuz we haven't played a game in over a week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Another good post! I think that part of what happened on the Bills was due to the mess that TD inherited. Other than Moulds, I am hard pressed to recall much if any real talent on that team. To make matters worse, it cost as I recall nearly 11 million dollars in dead cap space to rid the team of Fina and Ostroski, two virtual if not in fact scrubs. Sam Rogers was being paid 3 mil per season. It was a mess. It IS frustrating to watch NE. Vrabel, a good but not great player looks like a pro bowler in that system, as does Bruschi. With the Bills, I agree that it is time to look for safeties, a position at which we are aging. Also, imo there is never a bad time to stock up on big ugly men who can block. To his credit, TD HAS brought in some young defensive linemen. In short, I guess this philosophy comes down to whether or not one believes that the Bills are only a few players away from big things. I happen to think that they are. 212222[/snapback] THX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerJ Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 For the record, I don't expect a blockbuster free agent signing. I expect some good players/role players in the Chris Villarreal mold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts