$23,661,443 in Dead Money

[Kelly the Dog]

Some of that over-paying is likely a "Buffalo" fee for either playing in a small market or for a losing franchise. So I get that. Hopefully the new owner has the right people in place to end our history of missteps. Whaley may be the guy, although the Chris Williams contract looks mighty suspect.

Yep. I believe that Whaley may be the guy. And I will love when football guys, and not bean counters, are negotiating the contracts and deciding who is worth what. That may have happened already but I am not sure. I don't expect Littman and Overdorf to be back when new ownership comes in, so there is expected to be a new braintrust when it comes to contracts.

 

And I really like Whaley a lot, but the Chris Williams contract, like you said, is suspect (although, granted, we need to actually see him play a season at that position to know) and the way he has handled QBs, the most important position in any sport, is suspect. But I have a feeling we really have a strong GM for the first time since Polian.

[Dibs]

......

 

In a cap, there is a fixed amount of money, the more efficient you can spend the better off you'll be over the long term

 

....and being lumbered with bad contracts, the Bills have done the most efficient thing they could with that money over the long term.

[wolfpack]

Zebrie Sanders.............

 

[Dean Cain]

we could have taken Fitz's cap hit in 2013, instead we rolled over some to 2014. In the end it was a dumb move.

 

looking ahead we only have $1.6 in 2015.

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

So how does that compare ot the other 31 teams and how's it compare over a four or five year period? Wouldn't shock me to see that many teams have similar amounts every few years. I will grant you it's easier to accept when a team was doing very well, then starts to grow old, so you make some cuts. In this case that's not what happened

 

 

Steve Johnson $10,225,000

Ryan Fitzpatrick $7,000,000

Mark Anderson $3,000,000

Rian Lindell $1,375,000

Alan Branch $875,000

Kevin Kolb $500,000

Brad Smith $500,000

Zebrie Sanders $99,250

Chris White $30,150

Justin Rogers $16,875

Colin Brown $12,500

Da'Rick Rogers $6,667

Keith Pough $5,334

Jumal Rolle $3,667

Kendall Gaskins $2,667

Jordan Dangerfield $2,334

Darrin Kitchens $2,000

Kip Edwards $2,000

Brandon Kaufman $1,667

Colby Way $666

Darius Robinson $666

 

 

http://overthecap.co...p/buffalo-bills

[Dibs]

I have a rough idea. I know if we actually find a franchise qb it will be almost impossible to have both.

 

That isn't the case.

 

Firstly, C2C is a guideline teams try to follow. They do not always do so. For instance, the Bills spent over C2C in 2012 when signing Mario....and this season we are just under.

 

Cash to cap literally means that a team will try to have their cash outlays in any given year match that of the actual cap that year. Most of the time this has little effect on how they do things. The only time it can become limiting is when endeavoring to sign multiple large contracts in the one season. This is due to large signing bonuses as SBs are cash that is paid out in the first year.

 

This has actually become a lot easier for teams to manage as more creative contracts have become more commonplace. A lot of large contracts now have lower SBs, but also have guaranteed 1st(& 2nd/3rd) years salaries.....or sizable roster bonuses in the 2nd year to compensate.

 

Essentially C2C is a way for the lower cash flow teams(vast majority) to manage said cash flow......and has nothing to do with cap management. I don't know why it ever got a bad rep but it certainly doesn't inhibit teams from competing with the Cowboys/Redskins etc(who have large cash flow).

 

we could have taken Fitz's cap hit in 2013, instead we rolled over some to 2014. In the end it was a dumb move.

 

looking ahead we only have $1.6 in 2015.

 

Please read through the thread. Due to the rollover rules, taking some of the hit in 2014 instead of taking it all in 2013 made no difference to the 2014 cap numbers.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Dibs

[billsfan714]

Further proof that Buddy Nix was in over his head, thank god he's still a consultant for us.

[QCity]

There's a lot of people in this thread who don't understand what dead money is. This isn't $23M that we would have spent on players this year.

 

It was created by 2 players - Fitz and Stevie, and it goes away next year.

Edited August 25, 2014 by QCity

[Peter]

Further proof that Buddy Nix was in over his head, thank god he's still a consultant for us.

Nearly everyone on this board wanted the Bills to re-sign Fitz and Stevie and was excited when Mark Anderson was signed as a FA. Even the king of snark, Sully, was clamoring about when are the Bills going to do the right thing and sign Fitz to an extension.

 

Hindsight is 20/20. At the time, I thought the Bills had overpaid for Fitz, but I cannot give the Bills to much grief for locking in a guy like Fitz. In the end, it was a mistake as was Mark Anderson. Alan Branch decided to be a couch potato and mail it in once he got his $3.1. I blame Alan Branch more than I blame the FO for that one.

[nucci]

There's a lot of people in this thread who don't understand what dead money is. This isn't $23M that we would have spent on players this year.

 

It was created by 2 players - Fitz and Stevie, and it goes away next year.

But it's no fun thinking that way...doesn't give us anything to fight about. Having said that, the Bills are not in any trouble regarding the cap. Let's return to EJ bashing please.

[Kirby Jackson]

Thanks (as always) Dibs for keeping us informed on cap related matters!!

[Kellyto83TD]

And it will be freed up next year.... just in time to sign a FA QB

[Kelly the Dog]

Nearly everyone on this board wanted the Bills to re-sign Fitz and Stevie and was excited when Mark Anderson was signed as a FA. Even the king of snark, Sully, was clamoring about when are the Bills going to do the right thing and sign Fitz to an extension.

 

Hindsight is 20/20. At the time, I thought the Bills had overpaid for Fitz, but I cannot give the Bills to much grief for locking in a guy like Fitz. In the end, it was a mistake as was Mark Anderson. Alan Branch decided to be a couch potato and mail it in once he got his $3.1. I blame Alan Branch more than I blame the FO for that one.

Thank you. Not to mention that the contract that Fitz signed was the #19th ranked contract for QBs at the time and he finished #19 in the QB ratings. Not that he was good, or that the contract was wise in retrospect, but it wasn't outrageous.

[John from Riverside]

Why do people feel they need to inflate their numbers in order to prove their arguement?

 

Some of these contracts are like......peanuts in the NFL

[Kirby Jackson]

Why do people feel they need to inflate their numbers in order to prove their arguement?

 

Some of these contracts are like......peanuts in the NFL

I don't know JFH, that $666 in dead money to Colby Way is a cap killer.

[Kelly the Dog]

I don't know JFH, that $666 in dead money to Colby Way is a cap killer.

It's not really the $666, it's the sign that the number 666 represents. The Bills did that contract like that on purpose. And don't think players around the league don't notice. That could set the franchise back a decade.

[Deranged Rhino]

It's not really the $666, it's the sign that the number 666 represents. The Bills did that contract like that on purpose. And don't think players around the league don't notice. That could set the franchise back a decade.

 

True. But at least Ozzy will play the Ralph now. So... that's something I guess.

[4BillsintheBurgh]

That isn't the case.

 

Firstly, C2C is a guideline teams try to follow. They do not always do so. For instance, the Bills spent over C2C in 2012 when signing Mario....and this season we are just under.

 

Cash to cap literally means that a team will try to have their cash outlays in any given year match that of the actual cap that year. Most of the time this has little effect on how they do things. The only time it can become limiting is when endeavoring to sign multiple large contracts in the one season. This is due to large signing bonuses as SBs are cash that is paid out in the first year.

 

This has actually become a lot easier for teams to manage as more creative contracts have become more commonplace. A lot of large contracts now have lower SBs, but also have guaranteed 1st(& 2nd/3rd) years salaries.....or sizable roster bonuses in the 2nd year to compensate.

 

Essentially C2C is a way for the lower cash flow teams(vast majority) to manage said cash flow......and has nothing to do with cap management. I don't know why it ever got a bad rep but it certainly doesn't inhibit teams from competing with the Cowboys/Redskins etc(who have large cash flow).

 

 

 

Please read through the thread. Due to the rollover rules, taking some of the hit in 2014 instead of taking it all in 2013 made no difference to the 2014 cap numbers.

 

Thanks for taking the time. Is there a website that captures what you're saying with regards to the cash layout of teams and other cap related spending?

[Manther]

Just like we the benefit of Mike Williams contract and signing bonus already been paid out. It makes his contract much more palatable if we choose to keep him next year.

[thebandit27]

Yep. I believe that Whaley may be the guy. And I will love when football guys, and not bean counters, are negotiating the contracts and deciding who is worth what. That may have happened already but I am not sure. I don't expect Littman and Overdorf to be back when new ownership comes in, so there is expected to be a new braintrust when it comes to contracts.

 

And I really like Whaley a lot, but the Chris Williams contract, like you said, is suspect (although, granted, we need to actually see him play a season at that position to know) and the way he has handled QBs, the most important position in any sport, is suspect. But I have a feeling we really have a strong GM for the first time since Polian.

 

That is indeed the case from what I've been told.

[BobbyC81]

 

The bills play Scrooge when a guy like Byrd wants big money but theyn they spend money like a drunken sailor on players like Fitz and Anderson. It makes ZERO sense!!!

 

And guys like Chris Kelsay. I never understood the team's fascination with him and signing him to extensions for pretty good money before his contract was up when he was only an average player.

[TXBILLSFAN]

 

If we want to extend Spiller we can, we easily have the money. Spiller, however, is not likely to get an extension this year. The team is going to want to see how he performs. But if they want to extend him now, for any money they want to give him now, they can.

Spiller was only an example to illustrate how dead money could create an issue -- assume we wanted to extend Glenn, Dareus and Gilmore, we wouldn't have the cap space today to do it

 

When you spend bad money on a player and cut/trade him because he no longer fits -- it impacts your ability to spend money on good players -- the only reason it hasn't "impacted" the Bills quite yet is because we don't have many good players that are up for FA(except Byrd)and apparently there isn't any FA's you wish we would have signed this off season ---

 

 

 

 

 

....and being lumbered with bad contracts, the Bills have done the most efficient thing they could with that money over the long term.

There is a bad pattern here and at some point you won't be able to afford good players and won't be able to add good FA's. Teams cannot afford to use $25M of the cap on players not even on the roster long term and expect to win.

[thebandit27]

Spiller was only an example to illustrate how dead money could create an issue -- assume we wanted to extend Glenn, Dareus and Gilmore, we wouldn't have the cap space today to do it

 

When you spend bad money on a player and cut/trade him because he no longer fits -- it impacts your ability to spend money on good players -- the only reason it hasn't "impacted" the Bills quite yet is because we don't have many good players that are up for FA(except Byrd)and apparently there isn't any FA's you wish we would have signed this off season ---

 

Given the fact that they cannot extend either Gimore or Glenn this year (because the CBA prevents any extensions until players have completed 3 seasons in the NFL), they probably planned to take all of their dead-money hit this year. In that case, it would be very good planning, wouldn't you say?

 

Given that it is extremely unlikely they'll cut Mario Williams, Aaron Williams, or Eric Wood after this season, there won't be any dead money accelerators next season to take up cap room and get them to the minimum spending threshold, so that money is going to have to come from player contracts.

 

I think it bodes quite well for Gilmore/Glenn extensions, as well as a few serious FA expenditures.

[K-9]

Spiller was only an example to illustrate how dead money could create an issue -- assume we wanted to extend Glenn, Dareus and Gilmore, we wouldn't have the cap space today to do it

 

When you spend bad money on a player and cut/trade him because he no longer fits -- it impacts your ability to spend money on good players -- the only reason it hasn't "impacted" the Bills quite yet is because we don't have many good players that are up for FA(except Byrd)and apparently there isn't any FA's you wish we would have signed this off season ---

 

 

 

There is a bad pattern here and at some point you won't be able to afford good players and won't be able to add good FA's. Teams cannot afford to use $25M of the cap on players not even on the roster long term and expect to win.

 

With all due respect TX, you have a firm grasp of the obvious. It would be nice if teams had a crystal ball and could predict with certainty which contracts will end up being bad or not. The reality is that Fitz, Stevie, and Anderson represent the bulk of dead money and all three were considered GOOD deals at the time. Once these dollars are off the books, we'll be in a position to re-sign current good players.

 

And of course, in a few years, when these players are no longer fits on the team, we'll have the same naysayers come out and say how stupid it was to commit to these players in the first place.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[BillsVet]

What happens in 2015 when they will have one of the lowest Dead Money number in the NFL, does that mean they then have a good GM?

 

It isn't 2015 yet.

 

Yes, it is a fact. But what is the point that people are making on it? Mistakes were made.......dead cap is what you get when you rectify those mistakes. The saying crying over spilled milk perhaps applies here.

 

Decisions made in previous years have a direct impact on current and future state of the team. It's maddening to hear people say not to dwell on the past when it's still affecting this club. If the dead cap money was 35M, would that be the same situation? How much is too much to demonstrate things are not good?

 

Okay. So what? You didn't answer my question(s). What could they have done with that money?

 

Your arguments are consistently built on sophistry and straw men. So, go ahead and deflect away from the point that 23.6M is a lot of dead money, even for a team with a 150M cap figure for 2014. Dead cap money is a metric that defines the personnel people aren't getting enough decisions right.

 

And while every team makes bad personnel decisions from time to time, some clubs make them more often than not. Unfortunately, Buffalo is one of those clubs.

[QCity]

Spiller was only an example to illustrate how dead money could create an issue -- assume we wanted to extend Glenn, Dareus and Gilmore, we wouldn't have the cap space today to do it

 

That is complete BS. You are acting outraged because you don't fully understand the complete financial picture, and now you are making things up. The Saints had $2.4M in cap space. Did that prevent them from handing Byrd a $56M contract? Did it stop them from following that up with Graham's $40M contract? Boy, that $13M in dead money they have really hamstrung them.

 

When you spend bad money on a player and cut/trade him because he no longer fits -- it impacts your ability to spend money on good players -- the only reason it hasn't "impacted" the Bills quite yet is because we don't have many good players that are up for FA(except Byrd)and apparently there isn't any FA's you wish we would have signed this off season ---

 

Again, it didn't impact our offseason FA acquisitions, ~90% of our dead money is gone after this season.

 

There is a bad pattern here and at some point you won't be able to afford good players and won't be able to add good FA's. Teams cannot afford to use $25M of the cap on players not even on the roster long term and expect to win.

 

Finally, there is no pattern here in regards to dead money (Yes, I know someone will make a snarky comment about 14 years). Our dead money figure for 2015 is $1.6M.

 

There's a lot of issues to get yourself worked up over, this isn't one of them.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

Your arguments are consistently built on sophistry and straw men. So, go ahead and deflect away from the point that 23.6M is a lot of dead money, even for a team with a 150M cap figure for 2014. Dead cap money is a metric that defines the personnel people aren't getting enough decisions right.

 

After this season they will have virtually no dead money. Does that mean that they are good then? The point that someone made earlier is dead money is only a factor of you have to cut corners elsewhere because of it. The Bills haven't been in that position. Next year with Spiller up, Hughes up and Glenn needing an extension it would be prudent to have very little dead money (which will be the case).

[The Dean]

It isn't 2015 yet.

 

 

 

Decisions made in previous years have a direct impact on current and future state of the team. It's maddening to hear people say not to dwell on the past when it's still affecting this club. If the dead cap money was 35M, would that be the same situation? How much is too much to demonstrate things are not good?

 

 

 

Your arguments are consistently built on sophistry and straw men. So, go ahead and deflect away from the point that 23.6M is a lot of dead money, even for a team with a 150M cap figure for 2014. Dead cap money is a metric that defines the personnel people aren't getting enough decisions right.

 

And while every team makes bad personnel decisions from time to time, some clubs make them more often than not. Unfortunately, Buffalo is one of those clubs.

 

Yes, the dead cap represents sins of past FO management. Fortunately, it seems to have had no impact on things this year. It could have been a problem had the Bills needed this money. But as they still have cap room it isn't an issue. We are lucky to have dodged that bullet, but we did.

 

Part ot the reason for the dead cap is the turnover at GM and HC. We have a new one. I'm guessing you don't like either one, and would like to change again. Likely result? More dead cap.

 

The past isn't the present and it isn't the future. FO has changed significantly and there will be a new other soon. You really need to get over trying to blame this current team.

[TXBILLSFAN]

 

 

That is complete BS. You are acting outraged because you don't fully understand the complete financial picture, and now you are making things up. The Saints had $2.4M in cap space. Did that prevent them from handing Byrd a $56M contract? Did it stop them from following that up with Graham's $40M contract? Boy, that $13M in dead money they have really hamstrung them.

 

 

 

Again, it didn't impact our offseason FA acquisitions, ~90% of our dead money is gone after this season.

 

 

 

Finally, there is no pattern here in regards to dead money (Yes, I know someone will make a snarky comment about 14 years). Our dead money figure for 2015 is $1.6M.

 

There's a lot of issues to get yourself worked up over, this isn't one of them.

I couldn't disagree more. Dead money is usually a reflection of an organization's poor track record of signing players.

(with the notable exception to team's that structure contracts during Super Bowl contending years to keep team together, which has not been the case here). In this case it's most definitely a poor track record, just take a look at the names.

 

It's an indictment of the past FO. The debate I raised is WHO is that past FO, my argument is that these contracts were signed by the current FO, with the exception of Whaley.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Given the fact that they cannot extend either Gimore or Glenn this year (because the CBA prevents any extensions until players have completed 3 seasons in the NFL), they probably planned to take all of their dead-money hit this year. In that case, it would be very good planning, wouldn't you say?

 

Given that it is extremely unlikely they'll cut Mario Williams, Aaron Williams, or Eric Wood after this season, there won't be any dead money accelerators next season to take up cap room and get them to the minimum spending threshold, so that money is going to have to come from player contracts.

 

I think it bodes quite well for Gilmore/Glenn extensions, as well as a few serious FA expenditures.

Agree it was right decision to cut these guys (with exception of Stevie). It still doesn't take Nix/Brandon/Overdorf/Littmann off the hook for signing them in the first place

 

 

 

With all due respect TX, you have a firm grasp of the obvious. It would be nice if teams had a crystal ball and could predict with certainty which contracts will end up being bad or not. The reality is that Fitz, Stevie, and Anderson represent the bulk of dead money and all three were considered GOOD deals at the time. Once these dollars are off the books, we'll be in a position to re-sign current good players.

 

And of course, in a few years, when these players are no longer fits on the team, we'll have the same naysayers come out and say how stupid it was to commit to these players in the first place.

 

GO BILLS!!!

I never said I expect Bills to be perfect. But I don't expect them to be the worst in the NFL at it either.

[The Dean]

I couldn't disagree more. Dead money is usually a reflection of an organization's poor track record of signing players.

(with the notable exception to team's that structure contracts during Super Bowl contending years to keep team together, which has not been the case here). In this case it's most definitely a poor track record, just take a look at the names.

 

It's an indictment of the past FO. The debate I raised is WHO is that past FO, my argument is that these contracts were signed by the current FO, with the exception of Whaley.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agree it was right decision to cut these guys (with exception of Stevie). It still doesn't take Nix/Brandon/Overdorf/Littmann off the hook for signing them in the first place

 

I never said I expect Bills to be perfect. But I don't expect them to be the worst in the NFL at it either.

 

Overdorf? Littman? First you tried hanging personnel decisions on Brandon. That was bad enough. Now these guys make signing decisions? You've gone round the bend on this one. Maybe there are still secretaries who word processed some of those contracts. They need to GO! Can't have them making the same mistakes.

[BillsVet]

The past isn't the present and it isn't the future. FO has changed significantly and there will be a new other soon. You really need to get over trying to blame this current team.

 

I sincerely hope there are major changes, but that's not going to help the team in 2014. Those sins of the past are haunting the present, like eschewing the QB position from 2011-12 when several good ones came out. Or spending money on players and then not paying home grown guys. It may be the past, but those decisions are hurting the team. The LG position in 2013 is a fine example.

 

And while all 14 years of futility aren't the fault of Whaley/Marrone or EJ, there's an entire season once again not getting off to the best start. I can only hope new ownership clears the proverbial deck.

[Lurker]

So?

 

Also, way to trump up the stats by posting all 21 names, regardless of whether the last 13 combined don't even add up to 100K.

 

Agreed. Nothing but a lot of pot stirring.

 

I'm surprised Tim Graham didn't post this...

[TXBILLSFAN]

 

 

Overdorf? Littman? First you tried hanging personnel decisions on Brandon. That was bad enough. Now these guys make signing decisions? You've gone round the bend on this one. Maybe there are still secretaries who word processed some of those contracts. They need to GO! Can't have them making the same mistakes.

OK, you tell me who is to blame for signing these contracts, Santa Claus ? The Cookie Monster ?

 

God forbid someone is held accountable for bad decisions, no, let's not do that, it might actually lead to real change and producing a winning product on the field.

 

Don't blame Littman, don't blame Overdorf, don't blame Brandon.

 

I know, let's blame the dead guy. That's convenient.

 

Oh, wait, I know Nix was responsible for all the contracts

 

Give me a fing break

[The Dean]

OK, you tell me who is to blame for signing these contracts, Santa Claus ? The Cookie Monster ?

 

God forbid someone is held accountable for bad decisions, no, let's not do that, it might actually lead to real change and producing a winning product on the field.

 

Don't blame Littman, don't blame Overdorf, don't blame Brandon.

 

I know, let's blame the dead guy. That's convenient.

 

Oh, wait, I know Nix was responsible for all the contracts

 

Give me a fing break

 

The GM IS responsible for the contracts. Do you think Overdorff and Littman are picking the players and deciding who to extend?

[TXBILLSFAN]

 

 

The GM IS responsible for the contracts. Do you think Overdorff and Littman are picking the players and deciding who to extend?

 

 

The GM IS responsible for the contracts. Do you think Overdorff and Littman are picking the players and deciding who to extend?

I've been told numerous times on this board that Littman and Overdorf have oversight and a lot more to say than they should. A lot of teams will have a President or VP of Football Operations that works hand in hand with GM and the two are responsible. In this, case I believe that's Brandon, however, I've also been told that Brandon has no responsibility for anything that has ever gone wrong. ;-)

[K-9]

I couldn't disagree more. Dead money is usually a reflection of an organization's poor track record of signing players.

(with the notable exception to team's that structure contracts during Super Bowl contending years to keep team together, which has not been the case here). In this case it's most definitely a poor track record, just take a look at the names.

 

It's an indictment of the past FO. The debate I raised is WHO is that past FO, my argument is that these contracts were signed by the current FO, with the exception of Whaley.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agree it was right decision to cut these guys (with exception of Stevie). It still doesn't take Nix/Brandon/Overdorf/Littmann off the hook for signing them in the first place

 

I never said I expect Bills to be perfect. But I don't expect them to be the worst in the NFL at it either.

 

Three contracts represent the bulk of the dead cap hell you're describing. Which of those three were you vehemently against at the time?

 

You may want to brace yourself for future disappointment in this regard as there will be players signed that will outlive their usefulness to the team, especially if there's another regime change.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Kirby Jackson]

I've been told numerous times on this board that Littman and Overdorf have oversight and a lot more to say than they should. A lot of teams will have a President or VP of Football Operations that works hand in hand with GM and the two are responsible. In this, case I believe that's Brandon, however, I've also been told that Brandon has no responsibility for anything that has ever gone wrong. ;-)

Overdorf is in charge of contract structure, Littman used to set the budget (Brandon has for the last 2 years) and the GM ultimately tells them how bad (or not bad) he wants a guy. They negotiate and if a deal is to be had it is struck.

 

So next year when they have a minuscule dead cap number will they be praised? If big number equals bad, small number must equal good -no? The point is that it is totally irrelevant unless needed. They may very well need it next year with an expensive extension (Glenn) & an expensive free agent (Hughes).

[The Dean]

I've been told numerous times on this board that Littman and Overdorf have oversight and a lot more to say than they should. A lot of teams will have a President or VP of Football Operations that works hand in hand with GM and the two are responsible. In this, case I believe that's Brandon, however, I've also been told that Brandon has no responsibility for anything that has ever gone wrong. ;-)

 

Whatever input Overdorff and Littman had in personnel had to have been minimal. But even it the rumors were heard are true, what makes you think that continues, or will continue? I'm guessing guys like this will be gone, but who really cares if they can do the job they are meant to do at a high level? How does this reflect on Whaley who is the current GM?

 

And to address BillsVet, was ignoring the QB position in 2011-12 a mistake. Well, I believe it was. Whaley corrected that mistake by addressing the position the following year. He also did a lot to address the OL in the offseason. Not liking the players he chose is not the same thing as "not addressing" the situation. You have to give these guys a clean slate and not pin your perceived sins of the past on them. Cleaning house is typically not the smartest management strategy.

[Deranged Rhino]

Whatever input Overdorff and Littman had in personnel had to have been minimal. But even it the rumors were heard are true, what makes you think that continues, or will continue? I'm guessing guys like this will be gone, but who really cares if they can do the job they are meant to do at a high level? How does this reflect on Whaley who is the current GM?

 

And to address BillsVet, was ignoring the QB position in 2011-12 a mistake. Well, I believe it was. Whaley corrected that mistake by addressing the position the following year. He also did a lot to address the OL in the offseason. Not liking the players he chose is not the same thing as "not addressing" the situation. You have to give these guys a clean slate and not pin your perceived sins of the past on them. Cleaning house is typically not the smartest management strategy.

 

Especially if it's a repeating cycle every 3 years. It's impossible to build anything if you're constantly tearing down the foundation.

[TXBILLSFAN]

Overdorf is in charge of contract structure, Littman used to set the budget (Brandon has for the last 2 years) and the GM ultimately tells them how bad (or not bad) he wants a guy. They negotiate and if a deal is to be had it is struck.

 

So next year when they have a minuscule dead cap number will they be praised? If big number equals bad, small number must equal good -no? The point is that it is totally irrelevant unless needed. They may very well need it next year with an expensive extension (Glenn) & an expensive free agent (Hughes).

Yes, absolutely, if they manage the cap in way that allows them to resign their core players and add FA's, I will praise them. However, I will praise them a lot more if they win more games.

 

BTW, I think Hughes is also eligible to be extended along with Dareus, so they could have used some of that dead money for those guys, right ?