John from Riverside Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 How about.... - They decided to go with Aaron Williams and didnt want to tie up that kind of money into TWO safeties? - They didnt like the way Byrd was acting (If anyone is keeping track...notice how the guys that just go out and do their job get the extensions?) Gives me hopes that the same will happen with Glenn Byrd is GONE......good luck to him....good luck to us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Answer: Byrd wasn't a priority. They got comparable FS play out of 47 year old Jim fricken Leonard on his second pass through b-lo... LET IT GO....LET IT GO... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Nails Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) Also, it's not like they sat on the money. They went out and plugged a ton of holes and added great depth in free agency. They signed Williams to an extension and probably would have locked up Dareus if it weren't for his spice, spice baby arrest. They played it smart. Another franchise tag would have sent a bad message to other players and the guys in the current locker room. Edited May 21, 2014 by Jamie Nails Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KGun12TD Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 It's a question I've had for a while, but even more so now that the dust of this offseason is starting to settle. If the Bills brass thinks they're ready to win now, which they've repeatedly said they are, than why let Byrd walk. Why not retain his rights for 1 more year for $8.29 million? It just doesn't make sense given the attitude that this is a year we can push for the playoffs. I don't happen to agree with that sentiment, but if the Bills brass does......they should've 100% tagged Byrd. There's a huge void at safety right now, IMO. Just Stop already! The Effin guy didn't want to be in Buffalo...Goodness! Give it a break already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDBUFFCUSEFAN Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Answer: Byrd wasn't a priority. They got comparable FS play out of 47 year old Jim fricken Leonard on his second pass through b-lo... LET IT GO....LET IT GO... If you really think Leonard was comparable to Byrd you should put down the Labatt and watch a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manther Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 They could tag him just like last year. And just like last year he could hold out until the last possible minute. Then he would probably get some sand in his va-Jay-Jay and be out hurt again for a few more games. In actuality, we'd be worse off than if we just went with one of the young kids at FS and let them learn to play the position from the start of camp all the way forward. Agreed. The lack of practice and playing time along with the bad example for our young team must not have been worth it to the FO and coaches. I also agree with them. It was just time to move on. And, spend the money elsewhere. TAGing him would have just extended the the process and we would have lost another year at developing a player at safety along with the other issues. How about.... - They decided to go with Aaron Williams and didnt want to tie up that kind of money into TWO safeties? - They didnt like the way Byrd was acting (If anyone is keeping track...notice how the guys that just go out and do their job get the extensions?) Gives me hopes that the same will happen with Glenn Byrd is GONE......good luck to him....good luck to us Also, strong points. Argue all you want, but the Bills made a very fair and lucrative offer to Byrd. If you don't want to know about this because it hurts your agrument, I understand. There is this thing called google, search for it. The reports are out there and Byrd's camp isn't denying it. Reports are that he would have been the highest paid safety for at least the first 3 years. The Bills don't reveal the specifics of actual contracts so what makes you think they are going to release the specifics of an offer? I know some of you don't want to believe this, but Byrd did not want to be here. The Bills were smart in not offering any more to a safety who at best was injured a large chunk of last year or at worst faked an injury so he didn't have to play. Either way, Good Riddance! If you are a Bills fan, you need to let go of your Man Crush on Byrd! He is gone......he is gone....... All true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max997 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 It's not that he didn't want to be here; he wanted his long-term deal. That was the part that made him unhappy; not being in Buffalo...I feel like the distinction is very important. The deal was there and he rejected it then took what less than 4 hours to leave? He didn't want to be in Buffalo why can't ppl accept that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homey D. Clown Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Simply because they didn't want to overpay for a position that really doesn't warrant that kind of money. Overspend for that and there's no money for bigger impact positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 It remains to be seen what our new defense will look like under Schwartz. If rumors of his "wide nine" scheme being implemented are true, it is very conceivable to me that Byrds greatest attribute (ball-hawk who gets interceptions) will have a somewhat diminished value. This defense is being designed to be stop the run more effectively, emphasis has shifted to linebackers, and run stopping safeties. Not saying Byrd was awful against the run, but the Bills may feel that they have safeties who can be just as effective in that role. Aaron Williams is much more physical player, and a better tackler. The deal was there and he rejected it then took what less than 4 hours to leave? He didn't want to be in Buffalo why can't ppl accept that? In retrospect, it was New Orleans all along.... I remember, about a month before FA started, and there was still a question as to whether the Bills would sign him, somebody here posted a link to one of those player survey/questionares. That poster was upset because one of the questions was "best fans in the NFL?". His answer was "New Orleans". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Vader Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 We have 4 or 5 guys competing for the starting FS spot this year, I figure we'll find at least one good player among them. Do any of these 4 or 5 guys include Aaron Williams? This is where I get confused. Is A Williams our Strong Safety or Free Safety? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Jason Peters 2.0.......... Wrong. Peters was woefully underpaid. The market said he was a top 3 LT and he wasn't a top 3 lineman on the Bills. Do any of these 4 or 5 guys include Aaron Williams? This is where I get confused. Is A Williams our Strong Safety or Free Safety? A. Williams had better be our FS because he is not a good SS if used in the box. If they play cover two it doesn't really matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QB Bills Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Not sure what many of you are going on about. Whaley admitted that their offer wasn't as good as what he got from New Orleans. Would he have signed if the Bills offered that too? Who knows, but in my opinion they should have tried. Say what you want and drink the koolaid if you must, but players like Byrd don't grow on trees. He made game-changing plays and is one of the best at his position. And we aren't speaking of a long snapper here. I get that it's the off season and everyone's glass is half full. But to me, it looks like the same polished turd in the Bills front office. As usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maryland-bills-fan Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Spiller will be gone after his contract is up; Quote: "It's my first rodeo. I'll take advice from guys that have been there before. I'll reach out to Jairus [byrd] and see how he handled it," Spiller said. "I haven't talked to him. I've seen him this offseason but I will [reach out] eventually." Source: http://espn.go.com/b...ach-out-to-byrd See the value that Byrd contributed to the team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET1062 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 If the Bills brass thinks it's ready wo win now...why not franchis Huh???? Edit is your friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Ready to win now is perhaps a bit misleading. Think 1988 Bills.....rather than 1990 Bills. Winning season, playoffs, 1st in division doesn't mean the team is ready yet to make the SB. Tagging Byrd just to keep him for this season would be counter productive to the perceived improvement of the team. We have several young players who when their rookie contracts expire are likely to command large contracts......and several more young players who hopefully will be in similar situations. The new rollover cap rules mean that the extra money we would have paid Byrd for his one year tag year would reduce our cap room in following years. We could use the monies to help sign the team of the future rather than a player who isn't going to be a part of that future. I'm thinking 1987 Bills, as this QB / offense simply isn't proven yet. The Bills OC needs to prove he can set up an offense that can actually win games, and not just gain rushing yards. This team is still in flux with so many rookies, and second year players in key positions. Now that they traded away their best WR who was always open, and for all we know the best receiver may still be Scott Chandler. The Bills dumped Byrd for the same reason they dumped Stevie, and that is to make the team as profitable as possible for the new owner. JMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) If you ever noticed, his interceptions came in bunches in games that were well under control. Did any team or WR ever fear playing against Byrd? Yes. All of them. The guy was targeted less than any safety in the game, less than one and a half times a game in 2012, and still came up with INTs even on a team that at that time couldn't rush the QB. He held out because his feetsie hurt even though he had a full off season to get better and he stayed out until Aaron Williams came back. (why not be sure he looked good). He said that he could have played earlier but asked " ... how would that help me make my case?" Notice that Spiller is using him as a model, when thinking about his new contract- do we need a poison on the team? We had a better record without him then with him. Does it make sense for the second highest salary to be for a safety? ............just for starters. All of the stuff he did is reasonable. The Bills doctors have backed him up on the reasonableness of his position about his feet problems. He's never even remotely been a poison or a cancer or any of that nonsense. A hard bargainer isn't a poison. And does it make sense for the second highest salary to be a safety? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. If your safety is your best player then maybe yes, particularly if your QB is a second-year guy who hasn't yet proven himself and nobody else at the higher-paid positions has shown himself to be terrific long enough to make a second contract. Polamalu was the second-highest paid guy on the Steelers for a couple of years if I remember correctly. It remains to be seen what our new defense will look like under Schwartz. If rumors of his "wide nine" scheme being implemented are true, it is very conceivable to me that Byrds greatest attribute (ball-hawk who gets interceptions) will have a somewhat diminished value. This defense is being designed to be stop the run more effectively, emphasis has shifted to linebackers, and run stopping safeties. Not saying Byrd was awful against the run, but the Bills may feel that they have safeties who can be just as effective in that role. Aaron Williams is much more physical player, and a better tackler. In retrospect, it was New Orleans all along.... I remember, about a month before FA started, and there was still a question as to whether the Bills would sign him, somebody here posted a link to one of those player survey/questionares. That poster was upset because one of the questions was "best fans in the NFL?". His answer was "New Orleans". It was New Orleans "all along," after the Bills offered $7.5 mill a year and New Orleans offered $9 mill. Argue all you want, but the Bills made a very fair and lucrative offer to Byrd. If you don't want to know about this because it hurts your agrument, I understand. There is this thing called google, search for it. The reports are out there and Byrd's camp isn't denying it. Reports are that he would have been the highest paid safety for at least the first 3 years. The Bills don't reveal the specifics of actual contracts so what makes you think they are going to release the specifics of an offer? I used your "google" thing. Thanks for clueing us in on that. This is what I found. "Two sources told The News the Bills’ best offer to Byrd averaged about $7.5 million a season." http://www.buffalone...saints-20140312 And nobody's denied that either. It may have been "fair and lucrative," but it was way less than the Saints offer. There was a reason the (poorly disguised) Bills only released data on the first three years of their offer. Quite obviously the reason was that the last years he was offered a great deal less, enough to balance the total value out at $7.5 per season. Edited May 21, 2014 by Thurman#1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I guess nobody feels like me that we shoudl have tyagged him, signed him, then traded him for a pick in either this or next years draft??? Maybe Cleveland or NY???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 ..... The Bills dumped Byrd for the same reason they dumped Stevie, and that is to make the team as profitable as possible for the new owner. JMO Signing A.Williams up early to a whopping salary increase(5M?) goes against that theory somewhat though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) A long term deal was on the table two years in a row, I'm not saying he didnt want to be in Buffalo but he certainly didnt want to stay in Buffalo either if it meant taking less money (question is how much difference there was between the two offers guaranteed money wise; if the difference was 10 million I understand him however if it was 2 million on the 20 then heh it's not like he'll be able to spend it all anyway... Allegedly the bills offered 7.5, the saints obviously 9. If we pieced together the reports accurately, the first 3 years were similar while the saints offer maintained the pay rate the final 3 and the bills cut it in half. He would've been more likely to play out his bills deal but if at 30 he thinks he can clear a 3 year 15m contract, that's not a good thing for his camp Edited May 21, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 The deal was there and he rejected it then took what less than 4 hours to leave? He didn't want to be in Buffalo why can't ppl accept that? Because it isn't true. He would've re-signed here for the same deal that he signed in New Orleans...I'm unsure as to why you refuse to accept that. If we're keeping track, it was about 8 hours into free agency, and New Orleans was his only visit. Cleveland and head coach Mike Pettine--Byrd's former DC--chose to go with Whitner for about $1M/year less. Denver signed T.J. Ward for the same as Whitner got in Cleveland. It's not like there was a huge lineup of suitors out there waiting for Byrd. To put this in perspective, Byrd got $2M/year more than Kam Chancellor, who's a superior player IMO. It was New Orleans "all along," after the Bills offered $7.5 mill a year and New Orleans offered $9 mill. I used your "google" thing. Thanks for clueing us in on that. This is what I found. "Two sources told The News the Bills’ best offer to Byrd averaged about $7.5 million a season." http://www.buffalone...saints-20140312 And nobody's denied that either. It may have been "fair and lucrative," but it was way less than the Saints offer. There was a reason the (poorly disguised) Bills only released data on the first three years of their offer. Quite obviously the reason was that the last years he was offered a great deal less, enough to balance the total value out at $7.5 per season. This is spot on...the Bills offered what they believed to be a fair deal (I happen to agree with their valuation of Byrd). Byrd had other ideas, so they parted ways. That's business. I don't like it, but I understand it. I guess nobody feels like me that we shoudl have tyagged him, signed him, then traded him for a pick in either this or next years draft??? Maybe Cleveland or NY???? Not sure they'd have gotten a good offer...plus, he'd need to sign the one-year tag deal before they could trade him. Signing A.Williams up early to a whopping salary increase(5M?) goes against that theory somewhat though. Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts