machine gun kelly Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Guys- I'm sure you can read the article on the main board, but I find it silly. Outside of Mario Williams who did give us 39 sacks in three years before his revolt, was productive. Almost every other example was from the previous regimes. The premise is basically "Is Whaley making a mistake by drafting well and paying off with big contracts". It's the most asinine topic as that is exactly what the top franchises do. The Packers, Steelers, and so on. Whaley has been doing the right thing by resigning Hughes, Incognito, Kyle, and so on. Happy to hear your thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 The article: http://bills.buffalonews.com/2016/09/03/how-big-contracts-have-backfired-on-the-bills/ MGK - have to agree that this is holiday eke do reporting. Call it page filler. The underlying problem in this stretch is the Bills did not have an NFL caliber HC nor an NFL caliber QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freddie's Dead Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Article completely lacked focus. Of the 10 examples, 6 were contract extensions (1 for Dickie J), and 4 were free-agent acquisitions. And NONE of the examples were for a signing that occurred under Whaley. There are no editors anymore, and woe is us for that lack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Well then, aren't I the lucky one for having not read that piece of sheet article! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niagara Dude Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Guys- I'm sure you can read the article on the main board, but I find it silly. Outside of Mario Williams who did give us 39 sacks in three years before his revolt, was productive. Almost every other example was from the previous regimes. The premise is basically "Is Whaley making a mistake by drafting well and paying off with big contracts". It's the most asinine topic as that is exactly what the top franchises do. The Packers, Steelers, and so on. Whaley has been doing the right thing by resigning Hughes, Incognito, Kyle, and so on. Happy to hear your thoughts. I would not touch Gilmore, he is not an elite or even great corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downunderbill Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 This happens to all teams, it's not a uniquely buffalo problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted September 4, 2016 Author Share Posted September 4, 2016 Nanker - filler and not worth the read. I understand the Gilmore comment. I'm guessing the deal isn't done as his agent is overstating his value. He is worth a solid contract, but not the highest in the NFL. Tyron Matthews contract level set things from the over paid Norman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 (edited) Gleason or Sully? I don't click there anymore. Edited September 4, 2016 by plenzmd1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Quint Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 I still think Dareus will pay off. His potential in this defence is unlimited, but if he keeps screwing up, he'll be gone. I think people mature alot in their mid twenties, so Im hoping that hes turning the page on being a moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted September 4, 2016 Author Share Posted September 4, 2016 Agreed Quint. Plans- it was actually Skursky. I was surprised as that is exactly what I thought. This isn't normal for Skursky. He's typically a straight shooter in terms of stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 The article asks whether or not the large contracts recently given several players will be money well spent - which is a fair question - but then it goes on to list a bunch of failed guys who have nothing to do with them. Pretty pointless exercise IMO. Attempting to answer the original question would've required researching those players and their contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 I still think Dareus will pay off. His potential in this defence is unlimited, but if he keeps screwing up, he'll be gone. I think people mature alot in their mid twenties, so Im hoping that hes turning the page on being a moron. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/marcell-dareus-7718/ One of the main points I think the article should've delved into is the amount of guaranteed and front loaded money in the large contracts Whaley has signed players to. Players like Dareus can screw up, but they can't be cut for years due to their dead money. It's definitely a risky strategy and while I won't say it's definitely a bad move - at least not in every case - it's certainly something that's worth debating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Byrd Man Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Gleason or Sully? I don't click there anymore. Unfortunately you have to click to see who wrote the article. I've decided not to bother with any BN articles. I'm fed up with the constant negativity. If everyone stopped opening the articles maybe the managing editor would revamp the sports staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Gleason or Sully? I don't click there anymore. Skurski. Don't bother, he is just trolling. Honestly, it must embarrassing for him to have to write this kind of article. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/marcell-dareus-7718/ One of the main points I think the article should've delved into is the amount of guaranteed and front loaded money in the large contracts Whaley has signed players to. Players like Dareus can screw up, but they can't be cut for years due to their dead money. It's definitely a risky strategy and while I won't say it's definitely a bad move - at least not in every case - it's certainly something that's worth debating. This would have made it a much more interesting and intelligent article, but alas Skurski decided to only fish with clickbait on this outing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Skursky wrote the article. Seriously though, what the hell is going on with the Buffalo News? They're always negative towards the Bills - but they've really ratcheted up the hate significantly this offseason, and it seems to be hitting a crescendo right now. It's just totally depressing - I wonder if TBD should stop linking to it on the main page. With the season a week away, you'd think they'd be a bit more positive, or at least neutral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webster Guy Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 The article: http://bills.buffalonews.com/2016/09/03/how-big-contracts-have-backfired-on-the-bills/ MGK - have to agree that this is holiday eke do reporting. Call it page filler. The underlying problem in this stretch is the Bills did not have an NFL caliber HC nor an NFL caliber QB. completely disagree, and thankfully so does our upper management. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jr1 Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 NFL players make a lot. Film at 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Williams was a good deal. They got one good year, two elite years, and one poor year for $66 million ($16.5 million per). In professional sports, that's a good return on investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted September 4, 2016 Author Share Posted September 4, 2016 http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/marcell-dareus-7718/ One of the main points I think the article should've delved into is the amount of guaranteed and front loaded money in the large contracts Whaley has signed players to. Players like Dareus can screw up, but they can't be cut for years due to their dead money. It's definitely a risky strategy and while I won't say it's definitely a bad move - at least not in every case - it's certainly something that's worth debating. Barley - I agree your premise would be a worthwhile article, really looking into money spent on players and balancing against worth with the focus on guaranteed money, and from the Whaley tenure. I don't care about Jauron or Derrick Dockery. What does that have to do with Whaley's decisions? You could maybe go back to Nix as Whaley is a continuation of what Nix started. But here's the kicker, look at the players we've picked up on the cheap and turned out to be good players. It would be a much more balanced story, but that would take a lot of prep, vs. something to dump in Sunday's paper. If anyone from the BN is reading which I doubt, I'm normally very fair about your reporting. I liked Dunne, Skursky, and Vic. Heck I worked there through college and knew over half the building when there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDIGGZ Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Cowherd says we sign guys to big contracts because we have low self esteem and know they will go to a contender unless we throw a ton of cash at them. Discuss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts