first_and_ten Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 "That a player should play when tagged is assumed." No, it's really not. Which is why the consequences for not doing so are right there in the same Collective Bargaining Agreement that you're treating as holy writ in part of your post. What's assumed is that if they don't play when tagged, they'll suffer the consequences, namely that teams can fine them and that if it lasts into the season they'll lose game checks. Another assumption you're making is that Byrd sandbagged. Which Marrone doesn't agree with. Nor Whaley. Which is why they're trying to re-sign the guy. Don't pretend you know more about Byrd's medical condition than the team and the doctors do, because you don't. Don't pretend you know more about maryland-bills-fan's knowledge of Byrd's medical condition that you do. Because you don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 "That a player should play when tagged is assumed." No, it's really not. Which is why the consequences for not doing so are right there in the same Collective Bargaining Agreement that you're treating as holy writ in part of your post. What's assumed is that if they don't play when tagged, they'll suffer the consequences, namely that teams can fine them and that if it lasts into the season they'll lose game checks. Another assumption you're making is that Byrd sandbagged. Which Marrone doesn't agree with. Nor Whaley. Which is why they're trying to re-sign the guy. Don't pretend you know more about Byrd's medical condition than the team and the doctors do, because you don't. Well...Regardless of where the truth lies do you really believe Marrone or Whaley are going to publicly accuse Byrd of sandbagging? Come on now...Let's not be naive... Here's my theory for what it's worth...And it's just my theory, but hear me out... Byrd suffers from PI...Legitimate PI...It's something he's had before and played through...But...Due to his contract situation Byrd suddenly decides in a very respectful way he's not going to go out on the field unless he feels 100% healthy...Now...Understanding that NFL players almost never feel 100% healthy at any given time during the season this sends a clear message...A message that carries throughout the year...and...into this off season...The message is...If you Franchise me I am going to protect my future by ONLY playing when I'm 100%...Therefor if Byrd suffers say...a papercut...He's out until the thing heals...This is never verbalized...But it's understood...They know what's up... I think knowing this, Whaley and the Bills decision makers were unwilling to chance tying up over $8 million in cap space for a player that was willing to sit out multiple games, while getting paid, for what could or could not be legitimate injury issues...I think the fact that they were willing to spend $30 million over three years for Byrd proves beyond a shadow of a doubt they don't believe the PI to be serious, or chronic, or anything that would keep Byrd off the field in the future...So it's pretty easy to assume the injury that kept Byrd off the field for 5 full games, an injury that can be chronic for someone who basically makes his living running, was questionable at the very least...And more than likely it was a legitimate, albeit minor, injury that was used to send a clear message... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I think knowing this, Whaley and the Bills decision makers were unwilling to chance tying up over $8 million in cap space for a player that was willing to sit out multiple games, while getting paid, for what could or could not be legitimate injury issues... Overall, seems like a logical theory. But I still don't understand why we didnt tag and trade. Even if, say, we got a 4th rounder in a trade, it is better than nothing. Worst case, tag, no trade then remove the tag later and screw Byrd. I am all about sending messages for the future and at this time, the FO appears way too soft. If they indeed work out a long term deal, everything will be moot. But right now, there are some unanswered questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) Wouldn't it be ironic if the "master plan" was for Ralph to pay Parker under the table to shepherd young Pro-Bowl caliber players off the roster so that Ralph didn't have to pay them Pro-Bowl caliber salaries? But that couldn't be the case, 'cause then the Bills would just make bigger profits in a small market, Parker would take the heat from fans, and Ralph ain't cheap, right? . . . . . right? thats a bit out there.... i will say theres still a hint in the back of my head that parker may have pushed some of the controversy last week with tim graham as a "if you tag my guy, i will be playing hard ball the whole way." as the reports hit the training staff (something his client would be familiar with and perhaps unhappy with and perhaps pointing fingers at down the road), the PR department (someone hed be continuing to battle) and the money guys.... plus the fact that that parker/graham seem to have a relationship from the article last year..... well... it wouldnt shock me if parker led graham to the story a bit. Edited March 5, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 thats a bit out there.... i will say theres still a hint in the back of my head that parker may have pushed some of the controversy last week with tim graham as a "if you tag my guy, i will be playing hard ball the whole way." as the reports hit the training staff (something his client would be familiar with and perhaps unhappy with and perhaps pointing fingers at down the road), the PR department (someone hed be continuing to battle) and the money guys.... plus the fact that that parker/graham seem to have a relationship from the article last year..... well... it wouldnt shock me if parker led graham to the story a bit. Interesting. How much do shills make, anyway? Gotta be more than the Snooze is paying for TG's tripe. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) I don't really agree with this. They got burned by dirty pool on Will Wilford............And, then they had great free agency signings in the Nineties - Spielman, Paup, Washington But this was still building off of what was there. My point is as that teams foundation eroded so did the teams success from one year to the next. As the Super Bowl greats phased out, they never were able to rebuild a team for the new NFL. Anyone can buy a good player, and fill a roster hole with another free agent but building team in the era of free agency necessitates a different strategy than pre free agency football. Edited March 6, 2014 by over 20 years of fanhood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Overall, seems like a logical theory. But I still don't understand why we didnt tag and trade. Even if, say, we got a 4th rounder in a trade, it is better than nothing. Worst case, tag, no trade then remove the tag later and screw Byrd. I am all about sending messages for the future and at this time, the FO appears way too soft. If they indeed work out a long term deal, everything will be moot. But right now, there are some unanswered questions. I fully agree they should have tagged him to at the very least test the market for the first couple weeks of free agency...Just to see if they could get something for him...They can pretty much remove the tag anytime they want to because there is no way Byrd is going to sign that tender any time soon... Without knowing for certain it's all speculation...But again I'll guess...And my guess is the Bills feel that by not tagging Byrd they are back in his good graces...And they also feel he's not going to get near what they offered him from any team he really wants to play for...So in the end he'll be forced to choose between taking less to play for a contender, or taking close to what the Bills are offering, to a little more, from a team like Cleveland...The Bills are gambling that puts them in a decent position...That's just my guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kota Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Blaming an Agent for a players actions is stupid. I am sorry but It's the players ultimate choice to hold out or not. Eugene parker is doing his job by trying to get the players the best deal possible. If he wasn't successful at doing this he wouldn't be as high profile as he is. I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Blaming an Agent for a players actions is stupid. I am sorry but It's the players ultimate choice to hold out or not. Eugene parker is doing his job by trying to get the players the best deal possible. If he wasn't successful at doing this he wouldn't be as high profile as he is. I Not necessarily. Byrd was signed to a non-exclusive tag last year which allowed Parker to talk to other teams throughout the season and see what they would be willing to pay for him if he became a free agent. It is mostly speculation but he likely could have told Byrd others will pay you what you want so don't take the Bills offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 It's a specious conclusion for me that the bills have been unable to adapt to the UFA era. They did just fine landing players like Paup and Spielman back in the day, and those mid level stars came here in part because the team was anchored by bona fide stars like Bruce, JK and Thurman. When you are missing critical pieces, FAs tend to steer clear. This is not to say you can't land a Mario Williams if the timing and the money is right. It's to say that the sell is easier for a front office if you have more players like Mario Williams at the core positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSBill Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I am sure Leodis knows a guy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts