GunnerBill Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 They started last year with 4 running backs and a full back. I think if Roman intends to use one a lot then they will carry a specialist rather than splitting the FB load between Dixon and Gray. I repeat that traditionally Rex Ryan hasn't been big on keeping WRs and given our weakness at the position I never really understood keeping 3 TEs (except for Nate / Doug's genius 3 TE packages where we take talented players off the field and bring in Lee Smith and Chris Gragg). If we want to be ground and pound keep 4 running backs and a full back... they are going to more important than having a plethora of receivers. Unless Rex does a Doug and dresses 5 guys just for special teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Since there are typically 3 TEs on each team, then there are about 100 TEs in the NFL...based on that, he's well above average. I'm not carrying Chandler as a 2nd or 3rd TE. I don't think Roman's offense would either...I want my 2nd TE to be primarily a blocker, and my 3rd TE to be a guy that can do both and play special teams. Chandler, for me, is a fungible player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manther Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Isn't Pears a free agent? Guys that jump out at me are Keith Rivers, Manny Lawson, Chris Williams (post June 1st),fred Jackson, Scott Chandler. Lawson will not be cut. Chandler will only get cut if we gain 2 or 3 better TEs. I strongly doubt Freddie. Rivers and Williams cap #'s are very low. So, if they get cut it would be in camp...and they would have to be beat out as backups to cut them with their cap hits and annual salaries. Tuel will be cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manther Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 There are 5 to 10 RBs that are quite good that probably hit free agency. I think the Bills will go get the RB that want to lead the running attack in FA because there are different types and skill sets to be had and they probably won't be too expensive and the amount of them and the declj e in RB pay should continue to drive the prices down. It could be a great value signing and fit the team needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manther Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Chandler is above average at his position. I think it's just the bandwagon that ,"we need to upgrade the TE position". We are by no means set at TE, but cutting Chandler is by no means addition by subtraction, it is pure subtraction. Eric Wood is going nowhere. He has been voted by the players in the NFL, as one of the most underrated OL in the league, and best at his position. There was an article/vote a while ago. I'm on my phone so am not able to find it. Urbik is going nowhere he is the best gaurd on the roster, and the position is the weakest. Fred is safe, and his contract really is modest, so it doesn't make much space. There is a difference between clearing cap space, and getting rid of guys you don't like. Without a solution other than, "find anybody off the street" is just creating wholes and more weakness. It's moves like a lot of the ones posted that have kept us in the basement for the last decade. Draft solidly and a few role players in FA is the answer, cutting your better players without replacement is not. You don't cut your best gaurd and center, then cross your fingers you find 2 FA without overpaying for mediocrity you more or less already had. The reality of our OL situation is that I think we have better personel than we are getting output. I think we are above average at LT and C, Average/Servicable at RT and LG (Urbik). We have a HUUUGE need at The opposite gaurd position. Look for similar personel and a huge upgrade in production under Roman and Co. That said I don't think Richardson and CK are answers at this point, but I wouldn't call them busts. Some of these moves might make more sense next year if we have a good draft this year. Look for us to draft a replacement for KW in the next year or two. His contract is relatively large and he is aging. Agreed...Is the kicking specialist a Marrone thing or Crossman thing? I hope you're right.And/or Whaley? Dixon seems like he can be the new Jackson. Biggest thing I loved about Jackson is how he moved to Buffalo and made it home. I doubt we have another leader that does this. It's the harsh reality of pro sports. I read a quote from Pete Carroll yesterday about how they had to let leaders go last year, and next year again will be tough decisions. But, that is because of their cap. Our CSP is not at that point. Maybe in two years. Hopefully because that means er are deep, performing and winning AND most importantly drafting and developing players well!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Urbik another post June 1st cut. Saves over $3 million post June 1st. Urbik is a Whaley guy. He was picked up from Pittsburgh. And he played well his first season before regressing the past two seasons. There are 5 to 10 RBs that are quite good that probably hit free agency. I think the Bills will go get the RB that want to lead the running attack in FA because there are different types and skill sets to be had and they probably won't be too expensive and the amount of them and the declj e in RB pay should continue to drive the prices down. It could be a great value signing and fit the team needs. Why not keep CJ Also possibly Gray is gone? I can't see Rex keeping a Kickoff specialist and a Kicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 I'm not carrying Chandler as a 2nd or 3rd TE. I don't think Roman's offense would either...I want my 2nd TE to be primarily a blocker, and my 3rd TE to be a guy that can do both and play special teams. Chandler, for me, is a fungible player. Who is your replacement. By cutting him outright, are we now worse off at the position than where we started? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Who is your replacement. By cutting him outright, are we now worse off at the position than where we started? Personally, I'd sign a guy like Clay or Gresham, and failing that, I'd draft a Maxx Williams or Clive Warford. The OP didn't really ask for timing on when the player had to be released, so would I wait until after FA and the draft? Sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Chandler is not above average at his position. In 2014, he was 19th in catches, 18th in yards, 22nd in TDs,..those are all below-average, and he's been trending down in each of the last 3 seasons. Moreover, I think the team can do MUCH better, and that they need to if the offense is going to improve enough for them to make the playoffs. Ummm OK....In a passing offense that was ranked approximately average: 18th in yards 13th in attempts 15th in TD's. Chandler put up similar numbers to what the offense is doing on average. In fact much closer to what the offense averages out, than what our number one and two receivers did relative to the offense Watkins 35th in receptions 22nd in yards 23rd in TD's Woods Tied for 35th in receptions 50th in yards 65th in TDs Are both these guys below average as well. Based on the numbers you posted, Chandler is better at his position than our 1 and 2 receivers. Now I don't believe it, and I wouldn't even attempt arguing it, but based on your line of thinking, Watkins is well below average at his position and Woods is right around average at his. The offense is terrible. Chandler is not Jimmy Graham, but his production would be above average in an offense that performed (QB position/playcalling) above average. While we are at it. Lets just cut Watkins, because he is so far below average. Cut him because we need an upgrade! Personally, I'd sign a guy like Clay or Gresham, and failing that, I'd draft a Maxx Williams or Clive Warford. The OP didn't really ask for timing on when the player had to be released, so would I wait until after FA and the draft? Sure. That is super fair actually. As long as we have improved upon it, agreed. I still think he can be an asset on the roster, and create mismatches, but I would be on board. I don't know why, but I am terrified of the cap in the coming years, so other than guard/QB, spending in FA makes me nervous. That is probably just me. But Hughes, Gilmore, Bradham, Dareus, are all going to cost us money down the line. If we find a QB in FA, that will eat away at that too. I think Chandler becomes remarkably better with better play at the QB position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Ummm OK....In a passing offense that was ranked approximately average: 18th in yards 13th in attempts 15th in TD's. Chandler put up similar numbers to what the offense is doing on average. In fact much closer to what the offense averages out, than what our number one and two receivers did relative to the offense Watkins 35th in receptions 22nd in yards 23rd in TD's Woods Tied for 35th in receptions 50th in yards 65th in TDs Are both these guys below average as well. Based on the numbers you posted, Chandler is better at his position than our 1 and 2 receivers. Now I don't believe it, and I wouldn't even attempt arguing it, but based on your line of thinking, Watkins is well below average at his position and Woods is right around average at his. The offense is terrible. Chandler is not Jimmy Graham, but his production would be above average in an offense that performed (QB position/playcalling) above average. While we are at it. Lets just cut Watkins, because he is so far below average. Cut him because we need an upgrade! That is super fair actually. As long as we have improved upon it, agreed. I still think he can be an asset on the roster, and create mismatches, but I would be on board. I don't know why, but I am terrified of the cap in the coming years, so other than guard/QB, spending in FA makes me nervous. That is probably just me. But Hughes, Gilmore, Bradham, Dareus, are all going to cost us money down the line. If we find a QB in FA, that will eat away at that too. I think Chandler becomes remarkably better with better play at the QB position. I think Chandler's productivity relative to the other positions speaks more to the anemic nature of the offense and the proclivity for a TE to garner more receptions when the QB has to check down or take what defenses give him versus make plays down the field. I won't insult your football IQ by explaining further, as I'm sure you understand the concept well. As for FA, I think with the current TV deal and growth of the game, we can expect the cap to grow steadily in the next few years, so I don't worry too much about keeping all of those guys. I think it's probably even more doable than we may currently know given that contracts like Urbik, Lawson, Rivers, and McKelvin will all come off the books in the next 2 years as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tintonfallsbillsfan Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Rivers - gone Urbik Mckelvin could go if they sign Revis Chandler could go if they bring in a tight end Wood has a high cap number , i am wondering how the new coaching staff will view him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmotionallyUnstable Posted January 29, 2015 Author Share Posted January 29, 2015 Rivers - gone Urbik Mckelvin could go if they sign Revis Chandler could go if they bring in a tight end Wood has a high cap number , i am wondering how the new coaching staff will view him With a thin line as is, there isn't a chance Wood is cut. Chandler is safe IMO. He isn't overpaid, is serviceable and would pair well with a FA in Romans multiple TE set formations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) Rivers - gone Urbik Mckelvin could go if they sign Revis Chandler could go if they bring in a tight end Wood has a high cap number , i am wondering how the new coaching staff will view him I don't see any way they sign Revis. Keep Leo. Edited January 29, 2015 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 I don't see any way they sign Revis. That cap hit - no. Keep Leo.PFT just mentioned the Bills as a possible suitor. They were really high on him coming out and obviously Rex loves him. I would think that they'd be involved if he hit the market but probably not the favorite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 PFT just mentioned the Bills as a possible suitor. They were really high on him coming out and obviously Rex loves him. I would think that they'd be involved if he hit the market but probably not the favorite.i don't see our secondary as a weakness where we would need to throw all that cap space toward one guy. I think throwing it toward the QB (if we can get a guy like Bradford) and OL first and foremost is wise. I think the Bills need serious upgrading at key offensive positions and think we would need to "overpay" to get Revis here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 i don't see our secondary as a weakness where we would need to throw all that cap space toward one guy. I think throwing it toward the QB (if we can get a guy like Bradford) and OL first and foremost is wise. I think the Bills need serious upgrading at key offensive positions and think we would need to "overpay" to get Revis here.I agree for the most part. I think that with Rex in play, that defense and Revis only being 3 hours away from his home, the Bills would be considered. With that being said I am with you that it probably isn't the best use of $. On that note though I would rather Revis than Hughes with the $12M+ a year that it will take for either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 I agree for the most part. I think that with Rex in play, that defense and Revis only being 3 hours away from his home, the Bills would be considered. With that being said I am with you that it probably isn't the best use of $. On that note though I would rather Revis than Hughes with the $12M+ a year that it will take for either.revis is an absolute game changer so if course I would love to see him here, if it worked out where those other areas were also able to be significantly improved. There are some decent, young FA pass rushers out there like Pernell McPhee, JPP, etc. May help us either sign Hughes or replace Hughes. That said it is easier to find a pass rusher in the draft than it is an all pro lock down corner so Revis> Hughes anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 I don't see any way they sign Revis. Keep Leo. Why? I've already stated personally if they get Revis they will keep Leo. Corners get hurt all the time and Leo can do other things for us as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts