dave mcbride Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) Tom Brady, a quick release pocket passer, took more sacks than Kaepernick--despite his team being one you cited as among the best in the league and that drafted a LT at 17. Re: Brady, the Pats' line was really dragged hurt when they lost Vollmer, who was probably their best lineman. It' s also no secret that Brady had no receivers this year, which is the primary reason for the sack rate increase to 6.0 (far above his career average of 5.0): http://www.pro-footb.../B/BradTo00.htm . Despite the increase, though, Brady's rate was far below that of Kaepernick's which was 8.6: http://www.pro-footb...K/KaepCo00.htm. The Bills' collective sack rate was 8.4 percent, but they only rushed for 255 yards (unlike Kaepernick and Wilson, who both rushed for far more yardage). Edited February 27, 2014 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 i feel like the last decade LT as a percentage of cap may be trending down a bit, with some of the dollars shifting across the line. ie without looking at any numbers and i could be completely wrong, but i feel like we have seen some correction to that overvalue, and its probably getting closer to a fair representation of their role in todays schemes where QBs are more aware and pass rush can come from anywhere? someone with my focus may find it worth peeking at? I don't have the numbers, but imo every position is going down in terms of what percentage of the cap a team will allocate to them except QB and possibly wide receivers. It's because of the new CBA. The union thought that veteran players would cash in due to the rookie scale, but it hasn't worked out that way. Last season, a slew of veterans were forced to take 1 year deals. At the same time, QBs such as Romo, Stafford, and Cutler are now earning approx. 18 million dollars per year. The ugly truth is that teams do not want to risk having the poor level of QB play that the Bills had last season. If EJ doesn't improve big time, there is little doubt that the Bills will be a lousy team. The rule changes made having a good qb an absolute must. It looks like Whaley is sold on him. If so they are in a good spot to draft players that will add talent to our roster. If Manuel can't cut it, they will draft in the top 5 or 10 next year. Watch and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 I don't have the numbers, but imo every position is going down in terms of what percentage of the cap a team will allocate to them except QB and possibly wide receivers. It's because of the new CBA. The union thought that veteran players would cash in due to the rookie scale, but it hasn't worked out that way. Last season, a slew of veterans were forced to take 1 year deals. At the same time, QBs such as Romo, Stafford, and Cutler are now earning approx. 18 million dollars per year. The ugly truth is that teams do not want to risk having the poor level of QB play that the Bills had last season. If EJ doesn't improve big time, there is little doubt that the Bills will be a lousy team. The rule changes made having a good qb an absolute must. It looks like Whaley is sold on him. If so they are in a good spot to draft players that will add talent to our roster. If Manuel can't cut it, they will draft in the top 5 or 10 next year. Watch and see. Agree 100 percent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Hate to say it, but we probably would've found a way to ruin him. We most definitely would have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 We most definitely would have. The only way that would've happened would be never to play him. The worst coaching in the NFL cannot ruin a truly great QB Jim Mora couldn't ruin Peyton Manning--know what I mean? Bad coaching can de-rail a guy with potential--that I agree with. A HOF lock? Very likely not IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 If the Bills lucked into Brady, no one would care about any of this. Badly run organizations rarely luck out into anything good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 well deserved. First Team All-Pro 2011 & 2013 6 time Pro Bowler after leaving buffalo 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, injured, 2013. what a shame the bills didn't pay up at the 2nd most important position on the team. getting a solid Eric Wood out of that draft pick compensation softened the loss. but make no mistake, the bills lost in that deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 well deserved. First Team All-Pro 2011 & 2013 6 time Pro Bowler after leaving buffalo 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, injured, 2013. what a shame the bills didn't pay up at the 2nd most important position on the team. getting a solid Eric Wood out of that draft pick compensation softened the loss. but make no mistake, the bills lost in that deal. philosophically its not a deal you want to make going into it, but.... We didnt just get Wood even -- we got what will be $50m (not doing the actual math) to spend on other pieces which is also valuable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 philosophically its not a deal you want to make going into it, but.... We didnt just get Wood even -- we got what will be $50m (not doing the actual math) to spend on other pieces which is also valuable. Yeah, and while we are using our imaginations, maybe Ralph is going to re-invest the $300M+ that he pocketed during the past 14 years of garbage football back into the organization to cover those player costs as the salary cap increases and the Bills revenues remain flat. The Bills were tens of millions below the cap for most of the past 6 years since the Peters trade........that equates to a whole lot of talent that Bills fans never saw on the field. In short, the money they saved on Peters just went into Ralph's pocket. Going forward? It's a reach to say they saved $50M over the period of Peters extension. They hopefully will be extending Cordy Glenn after this season and that is likely going to consume most, if not all, of that future savings. HOPEFULLY they will be extending Glenn. HOPEFULLY. Don't count that chicken just yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Yeah, and while we are using our imaginations, maybe Ralph is going to re-invest the $300M+ that he pocketed during the past 14 years of garbage football back into the organization to cover those player costs as the salary cap increases and the Bills revenues remain flat. The Bills were tens of millions below the cap for most of the past 6 years since the Peters trade........that equates to a whole lot of talent that Bills fans never saw on the field. In short, the money they saved on Peters just went into Ralph's pocket. Going forward? It's a reach to say they saved $50M over the period of Peters extension. They hopefully will be extending Cordy Glenn after this season and that is likely going to consume most, if not all, of that future savings. HOPEFULLY they will be extending Glenn. HOPEFULLY. Don't count that chicken just yet. the eagles gave him a 4 year 50m extension at the time of trade, we paid the asset we got in return (wood) a rookie deal. weve already saved about 50m on the trade. i paused before submitting the last post because i knew the first response would be the "but we didnt spend it" and rightfully so. the only thing that made me click add reply anyway was that if we had any type of top secret lets get rich instead of winning internal caps shy of the real one, it freed up space in those too that may have helped net a deal like mario with some of the cash saved.... we got a very good player in wood, and freed up dollars additionally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Badly run organizations rarely luck out into anything good. The Patriots were a bad organization that lucked into Brady. It turned a coach with a Dick Jauron type record into one of the greatest coaches ever. good teams won't cry about Jason Peters. He acted like a child and we got rid of him. We got a good C in return and have a LT who is pretty damn good in his own right. This team maybe wins one more game a year if we have Peters at LT. turn the page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixxxer Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Peters Kelce the white guy Maclin all re-signed in a couple of days for more than 100 mil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 The Patriots were a bad organization that lucked into Brady. It turned a coach with a Dick Jauron type record into one of the greatest coaches ever. good teams won't cry about Jason Peters. He acted like a child and we got rid of him. We got a good C in return and have a LT who is pretty damn good in his own right. This team maybe wins one more game a year if we have Peters at LT. turn the page. Read what I wrote above. Peters is one symptom of the disease. Every team loses a valuable player it can't keep. But most other teams are able to overcome a loss of a player because they are better run organizations, and have better plans to manage roster turnover. It's really a basic concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 the eagles gave him a 4 year 50m extension at the time of trade, we paid the asset we got in return (wood) a rookie deal. weve already saved about 50m on the trade. i paused before submitting the last post because i knew the first response would be the "but we didnt spend it" and rightfully so. the only thing that made me click add reply anyway was that if we had any type of top secret lets get rich instead of winning internal caps shy of the real one, it freed up space in those too that may have helped net a deal like mario with some of the cash saved.... we got a very good player in wood, and freed up dollars additionally. I didn't save any money on that trade. I prefer that the Bills spend up to the cap every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 I didn't save any money on that trade. I prefer that the Bills spend up to the cap every year. wouldnt we all (or atleast most of us). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 The Patriots were a bad organization that lucked into Brady. It turned a coach with a Dick Jauron type record into one of the greatest coaches ever. The Patriots were bad in 2000, but they were not a bad organization. They went 8-8 in 1999 (certainly not terrible), but made the playoffs the previous three seasons and four of the previous five. Moreover, they made it to the Super Bowl once. There was obviously a one-year transitional period they had to go through upon Belichick's arrival, but they got through it pretty quickly. So what you're saying isn't really true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 (edited) I'm all for NFL players gettign every cent they can get because there is no loyalty in the NFL. But there's a way to handle your business like a professional. You don't ignore the organizational phone calls. you don't let yourself get out of shape, putting your teammates' health at sake. He's a godo player but comments like that make him one of the few ex Bills I don't like. And I'll take a guy like Eric Wood, the guy we got, and Cordy Glenn over Peters all day. Screw him. This "putting teammate's health at stake" claim is a bit much, and you have brought it up twice in this thread. If a player is playing so poorly because he is out of shape, then the coaches shouldn't him have him out there. I'm sure you are anxious to talk about this... Edited March 1, 2014 by Marauder'sMicro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenseWins Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Personally, I see these two situations as very different. Different FO and coaching regimes, different positions. SAME RESULT! That's what counts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 I didn't save any money on that trade. I prefer that the Bills spend up to the cap every year. The time value of money is completely lost on some people in this thread. The Peters trade was 6 years ago. What is 6 years? That is the entirety of the era in which the Bills reached all 5 of their AFC championship games......1988-1993. Yet they are talking about money it saves us now as if that was some kind of necessary lead time to reach the playoffs? Even the concept that it helped sign Mario 4 years after is ridiculous. Mario has a cap figure of like $18M this year and if the Bills used their rollover they would still be $30M-$40M under the cap. It's a lot of excuses being made for not being committed to winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 SAME RESULT! That's what counts... The result with Byrd is not the same, it is TBD. And if they do end up with the same result - a 1st, 4th and 6th rd pick? OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts