YoloinOhio Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 $$$$$ @SportsCenter: The Bucs make Gerald McCoy the NFL's highest paid DT with 7-year, $98 million extension with $51 million guaranteed. http://t.co/ea5gLz9pN4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Yowsa. More than I expected. 14m wasn't the number I pegged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big C Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Eeeek. Way to drive the market up, jerks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted October 25, 2014 Author Share Posted October 25, 2014 Maybe Marcel will be inspired to throw down geno multiple times tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proteus Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I have no problem giving Dareus that money as long as there character clauses involved. He is the best DT in football right now, arguably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I would love to re-sign him, but I would rather pay Hughes big money than Dareus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big C Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I would love to re-sign him, but I would rather pay Hughes big money than Dareus. Dareus > Hughes. He is an all around beast. But I want both, dammit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted October 25, 2014 Author Share Posted October 25, 2014 Ironically, Pegula's agency represented him before the ownership transfer made him sell the agency (I assume he sold it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeyBomb Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) The money these athletes (and Goodell) get have gotten WAY out of hand. But I suppose that's a different story for another day. Edited October 25, 2014 by DukeyBomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Dareus > Hughes. He is an all around beast. But I want both, dammit! Yeah, but do you really trust dareus off the field? He strikes me as a guy who will screw around some more after he gets a big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Albert Haynesworth. Never guarantee that much money to a defensive tackle. I know Dareus was dealing with off the field issues last year, but I think we've seen what can happen when he's not motivated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted October 25, 2014 Author Share Posted October 25, 2014 @PFF_Pete: Highest @PFF DT grades, last 5 seasons: 1. Atkins +131.3 2. McCoy +96.8 3. K.Williams +65.4 4. Suh +56.1 5. Dareus +49.7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I would love to re-sign him, but I would rather pay Hughes big money than Dareus. Dareus all the way. Yeah, but do you really trust dareus off the field? He strikes me as a guy who will screw around some more after he gets a big deal. That's why you put clauses and incentives in the contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Dareus all the way. That's why you put clauses and incentives in the contract. At some point you're still commiting pretty big bucks, and he has an agent fighting to keep ridiculous clauses out too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 At some point you're still commiting pretty big bucks, and he has an agent fighting to keep ridiculous clauses out too. KW is getting up there in age, and Dareus is young, and a top 5 DT. If we don't try to keep him, then we don't have an interest in winning football games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I'm not crazy about the fools in Tampa setting the bar for the rest of us with a deal like this. Let them create their own salary cap hell! But I do want Dareus and Hughes back. I wish you could just throw out the outliers because I think Dareus is a much better player at this point. (How he plays with $50-60 million guaranteed is another deal entirely.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 KW is getting up there in age, and Dareus is young, and a top 5 DT. If we don't try to keep him, then we don't have an interest in winning football games. It's almost like you aren't replying to my post at all. I was just pointing out that there will be some leap of faith in signing him. The team can't just force him to agree to any and every clause they might want. To address yours i've been strong in saying we can keep him still. I'd expect KW isn't in the long term plans without an extension that cuts his cup hit..... and you see something where we end up with either Hughes or dareus extended this offseason, the other catching a tag or two and a couple high round picks being added to replace KW and the whoever of the other 3 is more expendable 2-3 years down the line - if I had to guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokinES3 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) KW is getting up there in age, and Dareus is young, and a top 5 DT. If we don't try to keep him, then we don't have an interest in winning football games. Correct. This is the bottom line. At least as far as us armchair GM's are concerned. It's definitely a risk, but Top 5 DT's don't grow on trees. Edited October 25, 2014 by SmokinES3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) Correct. This is the bottom line. At least as far as us armchair GM's are concerned. If we want to armchair GM it, and 14m is the number, next to 16m for Mario there are a lot of interesting conversations to be had. We can certainly afford everyone but the ways to get there are not totally black and white and make for good chatter. Would close to 50m on the DL be efficient, even if we can afford it? If we are spending like that are these the 4 to do it with? good message board talk. Edited October 25, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokinES3 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) If we want to armchair GM it, and 14m is the number, next to 16m for Mario there are a lot of interesting conversations to be had. We can certainly afford everyone but the ways to get there are not totally black and white and make for good chatter. Would close to 50m on the DL be efficient, even if we can afford it? If we are spending like that are these the 4 to do it with? good message board talk. Agreed. Mario's situation is going to get a hard look in the next year or so I'm sure. If the D line continues to have as big of an impact on games as it has, is 50 mill crazy? It's a good question. I'm behind it. Talent wise, Dareus is surest thing on that line. Character concerns not withstanding. Edited October 25, 2014 by SmokinES3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted October 25, 2014 Author Share Posted October 25, 2014 One way to look at it is how much they would be paying the front 7 as a whole if they went with, say, Bradham, brown, Kiko. No highly paid LBs there for a few years which frees up money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 WOW.....maybe we wont be able to keep everybody Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokinES3 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) One way to look at it is how much they would be paying the front 7 as a whole if they went with, say, Bradham, brown, Kiko. No highly paid LBs there for a few years which frees up money. True. Kiko has at least 2 more affordable years on the rookie deal correct? Brown is getting Rivers' reps now, and appears to improve almost weekly from what I csn see. Edited October 25, 2014 by SmokinES3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 One way to look at it is how much they would be paying the front 7 as a whole if they went with, say, Bradham, brown, Kiko. No highly paid LBs there for a few years which frees up money. A valid point, and something you'll likely see long term with Schwartz - I've said since he signed that the big bucks and top picks would likely be the front 4 at times at the expense of the back 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 At some point you're still commiting pretty big bucks, and he has an agent fighting to keep ridiculous clauses out too. I don't think it is ridiculous to have drug clauses and safe driving ones given his recent history. Also a weight clause would be a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) True. Kiko has at least 2 more affordable years on the rookie deal correct? Brown is getting Rivers' reps now, and appears to improve almost weekly from what I csn see. If we don't activate him this year we have an rfa year after too. I'd expect rivers and spikes to transition out, Lawson and KW may not be here long term too. Add a high round pick to the line and you may be similar skills in the front 7 without wildly different dollars overall Edited October 25, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokinES3 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I don't think it is ridiculous to have drug clauses and safe driving ones given his recent history. Also a weight clause would be a good idea. I don't think they'd get it but the weight clause is a good idea. He is bigger than 330 now IMO. If we don't activate him this year we have an rfa year after too. I'd expect rivers and spikes to transition out, Lawson and KW may not be here long term too. Add a high round pick to the line and you may be similar skills in the front 7 without wildly different dollars overall True, Lawson and Rivers probably won't stick long if Schwartz stays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) I don't think it is ridiculous to have drug clauses and safe driving ones given his recent history. Also a weight clause would be a good idea. Right. But im guessing your not dareus or his agent. I don't know that the typical message board chatter of "yea, totally, just make it well fenced with clauses and incentive heavy" will always get the job done. Will he want something in return? Will he say screw it and wait for the open market? And even with protections, how protected are you? thats all I was getting at Edited October 25, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCOHEN13 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Eeeek. Way to drive the market up, jerks! yup... gonna be 100 million dollar deal needed to lock up Dareus.. MUST be kept but will make signing Hughes very difficult when we already are paying Mario huge dough and Kyle is still making big bucks too. thats gonna be alot of money tied up in DL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Another point to ponder if you don't trust him fully- could it make sense to let him play out his 8m option next year, tag at just shy of 10m and an option to tag at 12m the year after to give him 3 contract years as motivation. That's a 3 year 30m deal at the close of this year that all team options essentially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokinES3 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Another point to ponder if you don't trust him fully- could it make sense to let him play out his 8m option next year, tag at just shy of 10m and an option to tag at 12m the year after to give him 3 contract years as motivation. That's a 3 year 30m deal at the close of this year that all team options essentially. Seems like a no brainer, though I'm sure he'd holdout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) Seems like a no brainer, though I'm sure he'd holdout. That's certainly a drawback. Has he damaged his credibility enough already that he needs to be a good soldier? not all guys on the tag play it out til the last minute. Also does it give you another couple offseasons to test him before commiting? Not arguing for it, just playing out some options to hopefully get discussion going He also wouldn't be staring at losing his last big deal like Byrd was as he's younger Edited October 25, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 WOW.....maybe we wont be able to keep everybody Or maybe we will John. The Lions allocate a TON of money to their DL (Suh and Fairley). They also have to pay Stafford huge bucks. EJ and Orton combined cost pennies in terms of quarterbacks. Think about it.....qbs such as Dalton, Stafford and Cutler cost far more than double what we pay our qbs. It can work imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) Or maybe we will John. The Lions allocate a TON of money to their DL (Suh and Fairley). They also have to pay Stafford huge bucks. EJ and Orton combined cost pennies in terms of quarterbacks. Think about it.....qbs such as Dalton, Stafford and Cutler cost far more than double what we pay our qbs. It can work imo. Fairley is still on a mid 1st rookie deal and didn't have his option picked up. Otherwise, generally agree. To come at it another way- look at the crazy deals the Seahawks could support due to Russell Wilson Edited October 25, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabe Northern Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Yowsa. More than I expected. 14m wasn't the number I pegged. Time to fire up the "he doesn't want to be here" PR campaign once again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Or maybe we will John. The Lions allocate a TON of money to their DL (Suh and Fairley). They also have to pay Stafford huge bucks. EJ and Orton combined cost pennies in terms of quarterbacks. Think about it.....qbs such as Dalton, Stafford and Cutler cost far more than double what we pay our qbs. It can work imo. For the teams with confirmed or marginal (Cutler, Matt Ryan) franchise QBs, a significant percent of the cap is tied up at that position. For better or for worse, the Bills do not have this 'problem' and appear to be a few years away from it. Till that time, it is fair game to spread the dollars to the rare skills and pro-bowl type performers. Dareus certainly fits that mold however his past off-field troubles stop me from advocating insane guaranteed dollars. As NoSaint advocates, it is in the Bills interest to stretch his contract and tag him till he proves himself to be trouble free. That may not be a luxury the Bills have as there are a lot of variables that come into play - Dareus holding out, other teams willing to overlook his troubles and still pay him etc. Be that as it may, I think $51 M guaranteed for any position is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 The money these athletes (and Goodell) get have gotten WAY out of hand. But I suppose that's a different story for another day. That's what the market dictates. People love the product that the National Football League sells. It generates billions. There are very, very few individuals who are able to do the work to create the product. They are paid appropriately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 My heart sank when I heard this because this is the first time I've ever visualized Dareus playing in another team's jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 At some point you're still commiting pretty big bucks, and he has an agent fighting to keep ridiculous clauses out too. Yeah, I am not optimistic that he would sign a deal with a bunch of restrictions. I would call it like a 90% chance he gets in trouble again off the field in the future. So we would have to be comfortable devoting a lot of guaranteed money to a guy I would be willing to bet gets hit suspensions down the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QB Bills Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 He's the best player on the team. They better pay him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts