Could this be possible?

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

So you're saying we have a chance. lol.

 

All kidding aside, if we can somehow manage to keep Hughes and Dareus, enabling us to have MW, KW, MD, and JH it would give this team an identity for the next few years.

 

KW is 31. MW is 29 going on 30 so you figure the two only have 2 MAYBE 3 good years left where this D-line can absolutely DOMINATE.

 

Dareus and Hughes could be the present and the future. Dareus is 24 and Hughes is 26 - Hughes just entered his prime and Dareus is just starting to tap his potential.

 

But picture this: Lets say we franchise Dareus 1 year and then don't resign him. In 3 years the only piece left from this Dline may be? Nobody. Best case, we'd have a 33 year old MW. We can't let that happen folks.

 

Keep Hughes and Dareus at ANY cost.

I'm with you and think that the situation may have changed some. The Bills will do everything they can to keep this d line together. They are dominant and the core of the team. It IS definitely possible with the cap situation where it is to do this.

[bobobonators]

I'm with you and think that the situation may have changed some. The Bills will do everything they can to keep this d line together. They are dominant and the core of the team. It IS definitely possible with the cap situation where it is to do this.

 

It would be AWESOME Kirby. Our D-line can be like the Giants D-line a few years back where all they had to do was simply sneak into the playoffs and then DOMINATE the playoffs.

 

Many will disagree, but we can sneak into the Playoffs with Orton at QB. Maybe not this year b/c this year of course, every single team apparently has a winning record in the AFC. But with Orton at QB, maybe solidify the OL a tad more through the draft/development of our rookies, and orton can win us 10 games with Watkins and this DLine.

 

I want opposing offenses to piss themselves at the very thought of having to play us. Heck, I know Tannehill wet himself just now at the thought.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

So you're saying we have a chance. lol.

 

All kidding aside, if we can somehow manage to keep Hughes and Dareus, enabling us to have MW, KW, MD, and JH it would give this team an identity for the next few years.

 

KW is 31. MW is 29 going on 30 so you figure the two only have 2 MAYBE 3 good years left where this D-line can absolutely DOMINATE.

 

Dareus and Hughes could be the present and the future. Dareus is 24 and Hughes is 26 - Hughes just entered his prime and Dareus is just starting to tap his potential.

 

But picture this: Lets say we franchise Dareus 1 year and then don't resign him. In 3 years the only piece left from this Dline may be? Nobody. Best case, we'd have a 33 year old MW. We can't let that happen folks.

 

Keep Hughes and Dareus at ANY cost.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm 100% in agreement with you on a personal level. Just playing devil's advocate again though for Dareus (b/c you know this is going to happen with his agent):

 

I understand my client is a DT and not a DE, but my client puts up DE numbers at the DT position. How many DT in the NFL post +15 sacks? (lets assume Dareus drops off a bit and finishes with 15 sacks).

 

My client wants to be the highest paid defensive player in the NFL. His skill-set is unmatched at the position. He hasn't even entered his prime yet.

How many times has your client been the DPOY? How many times has he led the league in sacks? How many turnovers has he created? How long has he been considered not only the best at his position but the best defensive player in the league? When was the last time that he was in legal trouble? While I agree that he is trending upwards so are Peterson and Watt with longer resumes of success.

 

He will be paid in line with the great defensive players in the league but we are not going to pay him more than his peers. That just doesn't work in this league. Someone sets the market and McCoy did and the rest fall in line. Look at how the Haden, Sherman and Peterson contracts just played out.

Edited November 12, 2014 by Kirby Jackson

[Maddog69]

I think that McCoy's contract is what we are looking at. McCoy is 1 year ahead of Dareus, both were 3rd overall picks and after this year both will have been to multiple Pro Bowls. McCoy got 7 years and $100M. They are thought of as 2 of the best handful of DTs in the league.

 

I have Hughes in the Tamba Hali range. His value is climbing every game. Something like the 5 year $60M deal that Hali signed should be in the neighborhood.

 

The Bills will allocate large portions of those deals to next year as they have a good deal of cap space coming up.

I think this assessment is spot on.

 

[bobobonators]

How many times has your client been the DPOY? How many times has he led the league in sacks? How many turnovers has he created? How long has he been considered not only the best at his position but the best defensive player in the league? When was the last time that he was in legal trouble? While I agree that he is trending upwards so are Peterson and Watt with longer resumes of success.

 

He will be paid in line with the great defensive players in the league but we are not going to pay him more than his piers. That just doesn't work in this league. Someone sets the market and McCoy did and the rest fall in line. Look at how the Haden, Sherman and Peterson contracts just played out.

 

Great responses man. It's going to be interesting to see what happens. In your opinion, should we franchise him or just bite the bullet after this season and pay the man despite him having 1 year left. I'm still bitter about the entire Byrd fiasco. In retrospect, it worked out for us, but the way it went down was very ugly. I don't want to relive that again. I don't want to relive Jason Peters again either.

[NoSaint]

I love Dareus, probably as much as anyone on this board. With that being said I can't see him being the highest paid defensive player ever. Patrick Peterson's contract averages $14M a year, as does McCoy's and Richard Sherman's. That is the range that he will be in.

 

agreed. part of the issue with these projections of course being that posters are stretching it out to an 8 year deal. i dont think anyone, dareus included, goes 8 years on this. even 7 might be a stretch, but i could see it to get to that 100m plateau, and really being a 5 year (ie where the dead money from the signing bonus ends if cut) with some trash towards the end....

 

 

 

Great responses man. It's going to be interesting to see what happens. In your opinion, should we franchise him or just bite the bullet after this season and pay the man despite him having 1 year left. I'm still bitter about the entire Byrd fiasco. In retrospect, it worked out for us, but the way it went down was very ugly. I don't want to relive that again. I don't want to relive Jason Peters again either.

 

on the flip side, its gone pretty smooth for teams more often than not. if you are just following the bills it looks like DOOM, but if we go that route (and i could see us getting to a tag and negotiate situation that goes til July) its not always a terrible thing. and might even help hedge our risks for an extra offseason of good behavior and conditioning.

Edited November 12, 2014 by NoSaint

[bobobonators]

As for franchise tags, the player I'd probably tag in the near future would be Glenn. Extend Hughes and Dareus and tag Glenn. For whatever reason, I don't see that much drama with glenn. Anyone know who Glenn's agent is?

 

 

 

agreed. part of the issue with these projections of course being that posters are stretching it out to an 8 year deal. i dont think anyone, dareus included, goes 8 years on this. even 7 might be a stretch, but i could see it to get to that 100m plateau, and really being a 5 year with some trash towards the end....

 

 

 

on the flip side, its gone pretty smooth for teams more often than not. if you are just following the bills it looks like DOOM, but if we go that route (and i could see us getting to a tag and negotiate situation that goes til July) its not always a terrible thing. and might even help hedge our risks for an extra offseason of good behavior and conditioning.

 

I agree with you re: other teams but that's the problem with the Bills - they lack a successful institutional history of success in this respect. So if we start playing the game of tagging Dareus - as high price a FA as they'll come, it's going to probably breed serious doubt in the player that the team will eventually pony up and extend him, whereas other teams have been more willing to shell out the $$$ to retain their own high priced FA's after they've been tagged. That's the situation I'd want to avoid. Everyone in the locker room had to go through the entire Byrd fiasco and it wasn't pretty for 2 years so I'm not sure how much confidence there would be on the part of the player.

 

That being said, we have new ownership now so it's a new ballgame.

Edited November 12, 2014 by bobobonators

[NoSaint]

As for franchise tags, the player I'd probably tag in the near future would be Glenn. Extend Hughes and Dareus and tag Glenn. For whatever reason, I don't see that much drama with glenn. Anyone know who Glenn's agent is?

 

i suspect you are just feeling that way because glenn is quiet. economically, it probably goes Dareus, Glenn, Hughes on who would be a value under the tag. motivationally it probably runs dareus, hughes, glenn on who needs the extra push.

 

how a guy will actually react, we dont know. heck, we might get some indication with dareus and this option year as to whether he quietly shows up to EVERYTHING, or stays away.

[bobobonators]

 

 

i suspect you are just feeling that way because glenn is quiet. economically, it probably goes Dareus, Glenn, Hughes on who would be a value under the tag. motivationally it probably runs dareus, hughes, glenn on who needs the extra push.

 

how a guy will actually react, we dont know. heck, we might get some indication with dareus and this option year as to whether he quietly shows up to EVERYTHING, or stays away.

 

haha, yeah you're 100% correct. My feeling on Glenn is exactly as you describe but when there's money involved, who knows how the player/agent will react. You know his agent?

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

Great responses man. It's going to be interesting to see what happens. In your opinion, should we franchise him or just bite the bullet after this season and pay the man despite him having 1 year left. I'm still bitter about the entire Byrd fiasco. In retrospect, it worked out for us, but the way it went down was very ugly. I don't want to relive that again. I don't want to relive Jason Peters again either.

I'd probably just pay him. We already have his option for next year but I wouldn't let him hit the market. He is already one of the best few defensive players in the league and is on the upswing. The cap situation next year is good too meaning they can apply some of the money then in the form of a signing bonus (at least I think). Dibs can probably clarify some of that. Dareus is a star (if not a superstar).

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

The Haynesworth comparison is scary. On the flip side of that, it would be a kick in the nuts to let Dareus walk and he becomes the next Sapp, if not better.

 

Agreed in both counts. I am less worried about dareus being lazy on the field after getting a big deal; more worried about him getting lax and screwing around off the field. I think it is very likely.