Jump to content

The Economist takes on the Tyrod debate


Recommended Posts

I still don't understand how contracts for tens of millions of dollars can be done so poorly.

Well, as the article implies, the organization is far below the standard competency level of NFL organizations.

 

I used to complain about the Bills' lawyers when Ralph was still the owner. They were money grubbing short-range thinkers. But they were at least competent. Where did the Bills find whoever they have now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, as the article implies, the organization is far below the standard competency level of NFL organizations.

 

I used to complain about the Bills' lawyers when Ralph was still the owner. They were money grubbing short-range thinkers. But they were at least competent. Where did the Bills find whoever they have now?

 

Same guy - Overdorf - negotiates the contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"This Tyrod contract is an embarrassment," Trump said. "The Pegulas have been a disaster for the City of Buffalo. Absolute disaster. If I owned the Bills, our contracts would be much better and they'd be in the Super Bowl."

 

Hahahaha. Oh boy. I want CNN to ask Trump what he thinks about Tyrod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"This Tyrod contract is an embarrassment," Trump said. "The Pegulas have been a disaster for the City of Buffalo. Absolute disaster. If I owned the Bills, our contracts would be much better and they'd be in the Super Bowl."

 

 

Lmao. If I owned the Bills, we would have great players. How Great? The greatest players. We would build a Yuuuuge stadium downtown. How Yuge? The Yugest stadium. We would make amazing deals happen everyday. How amazing? The best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lmao. If I owned the Bills, we would have great players. How Great? The greatest players. We would build a Yuuuuge stadium downtown. How Yuge? The Yugest stadium. We would make amazing deals happen everyday. How amazing? The best.

 

And Mexico would pay for the stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing that the injury clause was made intentionally vague - I've negotiated enough athlete contracts to know that lawyers don't write anything without a reason. Seems like both the Bills and Tyrod have arguments to make regarding the clause...

 

 

There is also this line:

 

 

 

The first conclusion one might draw is that Mr Taylor needs to find himself a new agent. But he did manage to negotiate a pair of beneficial clauses in what looked on the surface like a somewhat unfavourable deal.

 

Which says to me that, like all contacts, this has some wins for the Bills (and Ty) and some potential losses for the Bills (and Ty) - so maybe the Bills aren't idiots, they're just adding to a contract what they need to, to get it over the finish line. It also says to me they use the euro spelling of unfavorable.

 

 

Maybe the one eye opener for me was, this says that if the Bills cut Ty and he's still injured he gets 27.5MM. I thought that if he was still injured by March whatever, the Bills would have to pick up the contract and he'd still be on the team.

 

Of course, if they KNOW he's not going to be ready by the cut date and they're going to owe him $27MM to cut him, they might as well just pick up the deal regardless. As the article says a few times, it's a middle of the pack deal...

 

 

 

 

 

And Mexico would pay for the stadium.

Which actually means American taxpayers will pay for it, but don't worry Mexico will pay us back! :beer:

Edited by Heitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"This Tyrod contract is an embarrassment," Trump said. "The Pegulas have been a disaster for the City of Buffalo. Absolute disaster. If I owned the Bills, our contracts would be much better and they'd be in the Super Bowl."

 

 

:lol:

 

Sad part is, I bet Trump has a legal team that would knock your socks off.

Maybe the one eye opener for me was, this says that if the Bills cut Ty and he's still injured he gets 27.5MM. I thought that if he was still injured by March whatever, the Bills would have to pick up the contract and he'd still be on the team.

 

Of course, if they KNOW he's not going to be ready by the cut date and they're going to owe him $27MM to cut him, they might as well just pick up the deal regardless. As the article says a few times, it's a middle of the pack deal...

 

Exactly. That seems to have gotten lost in all the shuffling. For all his limitations, it's not like they have anyone else ready to step in at QB so maybe they decide to keep him.

 

Plus, do we know how the new HC feels about him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was that article written by that idiot Jerry Sullivan!?

 

It must have been someone at the Buffalo News. Hacks!

 

Oh wait....The Economist.

 

This is now about the 5th article coming from big league national media in the last week or 10 days taking aim at the Bills squarely between the eyes.

 

It's a **** show over there...can we please, PLEASE strip it down to bare metal?

 

If not this off-season, next?

 

The clown show has to end at some point, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...