nucci Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Can you say MARCEL DAREUS ?? Cassel's contract has no effect on Dareus negotiations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simpleman Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 How often do teams get down to their 3rd string QB in games? I don't know, I'm asking, but I'd be willing to bet the percentage is minuscule. Maybe my memory is fuzzy, but didn't a #3 Tuel start a game EJ's first year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Maybe my memory is fuzzy, but didn't a #3 Tuel start a game EJ's first year? Tuel was our #4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 2013 Bills were down to 4th QB. Oh how quickly some people forget. That said, I'd risk it and cut(trade) Cassel. I can't see him being able to progress us through the playoffs, and I can't see that going with Simms for a few games during season(compared to Cassel) is going to much hinder our chances at making the playoffs. I would definitely take the risk that our #1 and #2 QBs don't both go down for a substantial amount of time(at the same time) during the season, but make it back for the playoffs. yea, its possible but its very rare to devote those kind of resources to. id pay for my kids schooling before a bomb shelter, for instance. you devote $5m to a practical high usage position, not absolute worst case scenarios. Cassel's contract has no effect on Dareus negotiations. its interesting - im one of few showing little worry about our long term ability to retain potential probowl starters (glenn, gilmore, bradham, darues) but seemingly also one of few that thinks its impractical to spen 3-4% of your cap space on a 3rd stringer. if hes 2, i dont love it but can stomach it. if hes 3, youve got to make the move though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 yea, its possible but its very rare to devote those kind of resources to. id pay for my kids schooling before a bomb shelter, for instance. you devote $5m to a practical high usage position, not absolute worst case scenarios. its interesting - im one of few showing little worry about our long term ability to retain potential probowl starters (glenn, gilmore, bradham, darues) but seemingly also one of few that thinks its impractical to spen 3-4% of your cap space on a 3rd stringer. if hes 2, i dont love it but can stomach it. if hes 3, youve got to make the move though. Yeah, that is what I was saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Because with the rollover rules we can move it onto next year's cap number. Exactly, the $4.15m they would save can be rolled over to next year when they will undoubtedly be paying Marcel close to $20m per year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) Exactly, the $4.15m they would save can be rolled over to next year when they will undoubtedly be paying Marcel close to $20m per year. To my mind it has to be a factor. If the Bills have determined that Cassel gives them a similar chance(or worse) to win games as the #2 QB does, then I can't see that the bean counters won't push for him being cut. Edited August 31, 2015 by Dibs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) If he's 3rd, or even neck and neck at 2--- you cut him. And it's not to save money, but to reallocate cap space to something else. It's entirely too much cap tied up in case of 2 injuries. If he's their 1, or clear cut 2, keep him. McKelvin starts on short term IR. Cassel gets cut when he gets back. Edited August 31, 2015 by PromoTheRobot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 McKelvin starts on short term IR. Cassel gets cut when he gets back I believe they only would get the cap savings if Cassel is cut prior to week one. If he's on the roster for week 1 his salary is guaranteed for the year. (I might be wrong but I believe this is the case because he is a vested veteran). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 McKelvin starts on short term IR. Cassel gets cut when he gets back. his salary turns guaranteed if he makes the first official 53 as a vet, no? at that point, if im right, it would be even crazier to cut him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Allan in MD Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 What's the point of saving money this late in the game with nothing to spend it on? Correct. Cassell is a major insurance policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) To my mind it has to be a factor. If the Bills have determined that Cassel gives them a similar chance(or worse) to win games as the #2 QB does, then I can't see that the bean counters won't push for him being cut. Are you certain Cassel himself is not the #2 QB? Even if he's not, I feel it's worth keeping him, though I am open to being convinced otherwise. Evaluating young QBs in meaningless preseason games is one thing while the intensity of the regular season is a different animal. We don't know what we have in Tyrod or EJ until we know. I'm as optimistic as the next fan, but what we're going to get from these two remains a question mark, both upside and downside. The possibility remains alive that we're holding fool's gold and Cassel will ultimately give us the best chance to win. I say this as someone who's been voting Tyrod since the day we signed him and is hopeful on EJ's development. That we don't know what we're holding is just reality. Cutting him seems like a risk with virtually no reward. That rollover money is only good for one season, it's not that great of an asset in my view. I'd rather focus on making the playoffs. Edited August 31, 2015 by Aaron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Are you certain Cassel himself is not the #2 QB? Even if he's not, I feel it's worth keeping him, though I am open to being convinced otherwise. Evaluating young QBs in meaningless preseason games is one thing while the intensity of the regular season is a different animal. We don't know what we have in Tyrod or EJ until we know. I'm as optimistic as the next fan, but what we're going to get from these two remains a question mark, both upside and downside. The possibility remains alive that we're holding fool's gold and Cassel will ultimately give us the best chance to win. I say this as someone who's been voting Tyrod since the day we signed him and is hopeful on EJ's development. That we don't know what we're holding is just reality. Cutting him seems like a risk with virtually no reward. That rollover money is only good for one season, it's not that great of an asset in my view. I'd rather focus on making the playoffs. the rollover money is a great reward, when we have so many deals coming up. heck, the rollover could pay for your starting right guard next season. if we have cassel at 3, and the need for him comes from the other two playing so poorly for so long that they are each benched, we are likely dead in the water at that point anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I think Cassel will be cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 the rollover money is a great reward, when we have so many deals coming up. heck, the rollover could pay for your starting right guard next season. if we have cassel at 3, and the need for him comes from the other two playing so poorly for so long that they are each benched, we are likely dead in the water at that point anyway. Fair points, especially the second part. I guess if he's the third stringer you can think about it, but I get the sense they still trust him a bit more than EJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I save the money and use it to sign Dareus Cassel's contract has no effect on Dareus negotiations. That's incorrect. Bills can roll the money over and free up cap room to structure the Dareus contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts