\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Why should Jerry Hughes resign? I think that he's playing great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Even if you have to shell out 25 million for Dareus and Hughes its worth it. Mario and Kyle are older players their big contracts will either be restructured or off the books in the next year or two. Keep the young guys there and use the dead money to cover you on the cap to cover the costs and in order to upgrade other positions of need (Guard, Tightend, WR, and corner) find the money with cuts to other guys on the roster and draft choices (Mike Williams would be a good place to start). Yep, Mario's can be restructured, and one thing I didn't see is the new TV money is coming. I can't remember if it was 2015 or 16, but there is a big jump in TV revenue, and the players get over 50%. In addition, the league received a jump in revenue with 8 CBS tr night games. This will go out to bid for next year and go to 16 games. So Fox, CBS, and NBC will fight for that revenue, as it has the highest ratings for a TR night. So my point simply is we will have the money to resign Hughes and Dareus. Lastly, remember the remaining part of our defense is not that expensive meaning our secondary and LB crew. We also don't have a lot of money in a QB or very high priced WR. Now Glenn will cost money in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjjr Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Hughes is going to probably get close to $10 million per season and Dareus would be higher than that. With Mario and Kyle, that is a lot on the defensive line but is also probably the best front 4 in the game right now. They have to keep these guys together through 2018 anyway.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Why should Jerry Hughes resign? I think that he's playing great. Plus he's in the prime of his career. No reason to resign now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent 91 Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 To your point of Dareus being an obvious stand alone star, that can be said for any of the 4 with this line not being greater than the sum of their parts. Only Mario and K Williams are proven studs... in more than 1 system at that. Whoever you dont block with 2 on this line goes off. Now the Spikes issue is interesting. Thr reason we have him is due to the fact that neither our DTs are very reliable against the run. Spikes is almost used as a 3rd DT which frees up Kyle and Marcell to do what they do. So do you extend him for that purpose. Or do you go find a run stuffing DT. I say we just resign Spikes and keep this defense clicking. We have Dareus atleast 1 more year. Get 2 winning seasons tied up and let the money work itself out later. A winning team has an easier time keeping players. None at all for either player. Williams will cost us $6.8M if we keep him, but zero dead money if we cut him(which I am sure we are going to do). I am uncertain about Hughes. Where Dareus is obviously a stand alone star, I feel that Hughes could well be benefiting from having 3 star DLmen to play with. Ignoring the whole cap implications, Hughes may well be way overpriced for his talent level IMO. With Kyle Williams becoming a FA in 2017(aged 34), I would think that Dareus is the #1 signing priority for the Bills. For those interested, Dareus will be earning $8M+ next year. One also needs to consider the amount of money already invested in the DL. The 2015 Bills roster sees the top 2 players being DL (Mario & Dareus) as well as the 6th highest salary (K.Williams). With Dareus likely to get a pay increase re-signing, I cannot fathom how the Bills could justify adding another big contract to the DL. There is only so much money to go around. We certainly could re-sign Hughes, but with Glenn and Dareus needed to be signed for big dollars.....and with the hopeful re-signing of Spikes....plus maybe re-signing Gilmore......by the time we want to re-sign Kiko, Watkins, Brown etc there will be little money left......and if KW and/or Mario are still playing at elite level, we will also want to re-sign them in the future. I tend to think that Hughes has earned himself a big payday, but with a different team. I also tend to think that the team who signs Hughes will not get good value for money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 not one to normally correct errors it should say re-sign Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 If Hughes wants $10million per year let him go... if he can be convinced to take $7-8million a year I'd sign him. But i will keep saying Dareus and Glenn are the priorities and I do think you have to start thinking longer term with Gilmore and Kiko etc as well. At some point we are going to need Mario to restructure. It also might depend on whether they choose to extend Orton and if so for how many $$$. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) If Hughes wants $10million per year let him go... if he can be convinced to take $7-8million a year I'd sign him. But i will keep saying Dareus and Glenn are the priorities and I do think you have to start thinking longer term with Gilmore and Kiko etc as well. At some point we are going to need Mario to restructure. It also might depend on whether they choose to extend Orton and if so for how many $$$. Dareus is signed through 2015....before we thinking of signing Kiko long term , let's wait to see how he plays when he returns. He's only played one year....no rush Of course Hughes will want $10M per year. Who doesn't. Just doubtful anyone will pay him that much Edited October 28, 2014 by nucci Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowery4 Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Terry and Kim are cheap (just wanted to get that done with). I'm a Hughes fan. That said, where was he against the Jets? I know this because I played him on my fantasy team as an IDP and he scored zero points! Not happy about this. I saw much more of Manny Lawson, I think that had to do with containment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Yea - one of the adjustments at HT was more Lawson in for Hughes second half. One thing Lawson excells at is setting the edge and being disciplined in doing it. Dareus is signed through 2015....before we thinking of signing Kiko long term , let's wait to see how he plays when he returns. He's only played one year....no rush Of course Hughes will want $10M per year. Who doesn't. Just doubtful anyone will pay him that much I think Dareus value is only going to go up. I wasn't advocating signing Kiko long term yet (I don't think we can anyway under the cba) but I think they have to be planning their space 2-3 years ahead in the knowledge that the likes of Kiko and Gilmore will be coming up for decisions. Obviously you negotiate with Hughes... but if he won't sign for $8million per year then I think that is where you draw the line. Maybe we could frontload a bit wary of the need to extend those guys coming up in the next 2-3 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Dareus has already indicated that he wants $100M and with that McCoy contract he will be right in that neighborhood. They were both 3rd overall picks, both went to the Pro Bowl in year 3 (McCoy may have already gone in his 2nd) and both are ascending. Their contracts will be very, very close. Hughes is probably $10M in my mind. Tamba Hali is 5 years and $55M. I think that Hughes will be a tick below that but not far. Look for Hughes to be courted by the Redskins. Orakpo was on (I believe) a one year $11 M deal. He underperformed and is now out for the season with an injury. He will probably be allowed to walk. Hughes fits in well with what they want to do. Whaley is going to earn his money working the cap puzzle trying to prioritize the talent up for new contracts. Most people would agree that Dareus is the priority. He surprised me with his quantum leap forward, especially after a problematic offseason. If I'm not mistaken Orton has another year on his deal. It wouldn't be surprising if his agent "requests" an added value contract. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaattMaann Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Dareus is under our control for two more seasons (contract next year, ability to tag him for the 16/17 season) - yes I want to re-sign him to ensure he is a bill for a long time, but we have the ability to ensure that for at least two more seasons Hughes is a luxury, and if signing that luxury to a 8-10 million a year deal for the next five jeopardizes our ability to upgrade the o-line, add impact players at WR or TR or RB, continue to build franchise wide depth with QUALITY players and re-sign our young stars (Glenn, Gilmore, Watkins, possibly Orton, kiko, etc.) then I'd rather let him walk - situational pass rushers can be had for cheaper and we already have some good DEs on the roster that can contribute immediately Yes we are currently in good cap shape, but I do not want to rush to ruin our good cap position by handing out huge deals to players who may not be worth that kind of money Hughes on a 3 year, 21- 25 mill contract? Maybe I'd be down for that....anything more than 3 years ties up a lot of potentially needed money in the future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Dareus is signed through 2015....before we thinking of signing Kiko long term , let's wait to see how he plays when he returns. He's only played one year....no rush Of course Hughes will want $10M per year. Who doesn't. Just doubtful anyone will pay him that much The Redskins have the money and the need. They are going to probably let Orakpo go (now injured) and could comfortably use his contract space for Huges. He would be a very appealing player for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 3.6m cap rollover + cap increase + dead money release should mean we'll have some wiggle room. If we can unload Mike Williams, and restructure Mario's contract, we should be pretty golden for a couple years. The question is will the Bills continue to follow the cash-to-cap policy. If so, I don't see how the Bills will be able to generate a ton of new cash to pay up front. The only way they restructure Mario would be to give his money upfront and spread it over the additional years. That requires upfront money, something only teams like Dallas and Patriots have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Gerald McCoy is getting $14M a year which is the neighborhood that Dareus will be in. He is going to be around $100M with about half guaranteed. Sorry, I miscommunicated. Dareus will be getting McCoy money. No doubt. How much we we have to pay Hughes? 9? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) The question is will the Bills continue to follow the cash-to-cap policy. If so, I don't see how the Bills will be able to generate a ton of new cash to pay up front. The only way they restructure Mario would be to give his money upfront and spread it over the additional years. That requires upfront money, something only teams like Dallas and Patriots have. It sounds like you don't understand what C2C is. All that C2C means is that a team will try and spend roughly the cap level in actual dollars in a year. It rarely has any influence on how a team manages things.....and now that huge signing bonuses are not as commonplace(teams guaranteeing first several years of contracts etc), it doesn't even influence how they structure contracts. For some reason C2C got a bad reputation as if teams were being cheap or trying to save money by using it. The reality is it is a simple accounting tool to help teams stay not only under the cap, but also to help with their cash flow situations. It is also a basic guide that teams use and, the Bills for instance, have gone above C2C a few times in the last bunch of years when it became necessary to do so(the Mario year being one of them). You might also be interested to know that most NFL team use a C2C system. It is only the Dallas' s and Washington's of the league who can afford to ignore their cashflow situations. Edited October 28, 2014 by Dibs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanM.D. Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 In related news, this thread discussion should remove any doubt about us re-signing CJ Spiller. I'd like to see him back at a discount but I'm not sure if we can even afford that. Too many other durable playmakers to sign as noted above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 I'd like to see Hughes and Dareus with the team beyond 2015. Dareus will command $12-14.5 M a year and Hughes will get $9-11 M a year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 The Redskins have the money and the need. They are going to probably let Orakpo go (now injured) and could comfortably use his contract space for Huges. He would be a very appealing player for them. Yep, good point. It sounds like you don't understand what C2C is. All that C2C means is that a team will try and spend roughly the cap level in actual dollars in a year. It rarely has any influence on how a team manages things.....and now that huge signing bonuses are not as commonplace(teams guaranteeing first several years of contracts etc), it doesn't even influence how they structure contracts. For some reason C2C got a bad reputation as if teams were being cheap or trying to save money by using it. The reality is it is a simple accounting tool to help teams stay not only under the cap, but also to help with their cash flow situations. It is also a basic guide that teams use and, the Bills for instance, have gone above C2C a few times in the last bunch of years when it became necessary to do so(the Mario year being one of them). You might also be interested to know that most NFL team use a C2C system. It is only the Dallas' s and Washington's of the league who can afford to ignore their cashflow situations. Don't let facts and logic get in his way. The question is will the Bills continue to follow the cash-to-cap policy. If so, I don't see how the Bills will be able to generate a ton of new cash to pay up front. The only way they restructure Mario would be to give his money upfront and spread it over the additional years. That requires upfront money, something only teams like Dallas and Patriots have. We have a new owner worth over $4B...I think there is enough upfront money available if needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Sorry, I miscommunicated. Dareus will be getting McCoy money. No doubt. How much we we have to pay Hughes? 9? If I had to guess he will be around Tamba Hali (5 years & $55M). My guess is that he is slightly below that. The pass rushing contracts are out of control at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts