Billy Zabka Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 (edited) With foresight, no he wasn't worth a 2nd round tender give his 38 catch, 438 yard average the previous 2 seasons. And no team would have tendered him at the 2nd round level. In hindsight, Goodwin replaced his production. Yeah, no. He was just another receiver in the Cheaters' system. They overpaid him just to get him away from the Bills. Goodwin was a weak blocking one trick pony at WR with a small catch radius and injury prone body, Hogan was an excellent blocker who could run all the routes. Goodwin was sadly a WR#2 much of the year and struggled to match Hogan's production as a #4 WR when he played through torn wrist ligaments. Hogan was clearly worth the 2nd round tender last year as opposed to the Goodwin, Salas, Harvin, Powell turd sandwich we had that probably cost more in salary than Hogan would have. Edited April 21, 2017 by Billy Zabka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 I meant their players...Dave said that the reason that many of their picks don't make an impact is that the roster is so difficult to crack. I think making an assessment of their roster based on how they do elsewhere isn't quite right. They look for certain types of players for their system. Deion Branch in his prime was a great player for them and a perfect fit, but it didn't mean that he was so physically talented that he could transcend their system. And some of the guys they let go are entering the downswing of their career and simply want to get paid before it's all said and done (Seymour etc.) Regardless of how he played for the Raiders, he played at a near HOF-level by any standard while he was with the Pats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 I made a thread in early March predicting this exact situation and said the Bills should have placed a 2nd Round tender on him or he would be poached. I said the million bucks they gave to a 32 year old backup fullback in Mike Tolbert would have been much wisely spent locking down Gillislee who is an elite goal line and short yardage back and proven backup to a 29 year old RB with a ton of mileage and hamstring issues. Many others on the boards and in the local media said the same thing well before the Pats signed him. To say nobody said it originally is total bunk and excuse making. I looked and you did start a thread. One other person agreed with you. As for the 2nd round tender, it would have been a 1-year $2.746M deal. He got a 2-year $6.4M. Slightly more money (but nothing that breaks the bank) and gives them an extra year. If they choose to match. The extra $450K isn't anything to spaz out about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Maiden Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 Goodwin was a weak blocking one trick pony at WR with a small catch radius and injury prone body, Hogan was an excellent blocker who could run all the routes. Goodwin was sadly a WR#2 much of the year and struggled to match Hogan's production as a #4 WR when he played through torn wrist ligaments. Hogan was clearly worth the 2nd round tender last year as opposed to the Goodwin, Salas, Harvin, Powell turd sandwich we had that probably cost more in salary than Hogan would have. That has to be the greatest screen name on the board...well done ! I think making an assessment of their roster based on how they do elsewhere isn't quite right. They look for certain types of players for their system. Deion Branch in his prime was a great player for them and a perfect fit, but it didn't mean that he was so physically talented that he could transcend their system. And some of the guys they let go are entering the downswing of their career and simply want to get paid before it's all said and done (Seymour etc.) Regardless of how he played for the Raiders, he played at a near HOF-level by any standard while he was with the Pats. And it's not like every player that leaves is awful elsewhere.....Collins played well with the Brown ( which is a feat in itself ) and Chandler Jones is doing his thing in AZ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 Goodwin was a weak blocking one trick pony at WR with a small catch radius and injury prone body, Hogan was an excellent blocker who could run all the routes. Goodwin was sadly a WR#2 much of the year and struggled to match Hogan's production as a #4 WR when he played through torn wrist ligaments. Hogan was clearly worth the 2nd round tender last year as opposed to the Goodwin, Salas, Harvin, Powell turd sandwich we had that probably cost more in salary than Hogan would have. The Bills' running game was better in 2016 than the year before. Hogan was healthy in 2015. And production is production. Hogan wasn't worth a 2nd rounder and still isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 I think making an assessment of their roster based on how they do elsewhere isn't quite right. They look for certain types of players for their system. Deion Branch in his prime was a great player for them and a perfect fit, but it didn't mean that he was so physically talented that he could transcend their system. And some of the guys they let go are entering the downswing of their career and simply want to get paid before it's all said and done (Seymour etc.) Regardless of how he played for the Raiders, he played at a near HOF-level by any standard while he was with the Pats. Like I said, it's a topic worthy of further discussion, so I don't mean to discount it straight away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 Like I said, it's a topic worthy of further discussion, so I don't mean to discount it straight away. Fair enough! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D521646 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 Ok, my take is that we let him walk, and here's why. First off, as good as he was, it's very difficult to get a real gauge of his talents as a leading back, which he would not be here, but might win the job at NE. The 5th was the right move by Whaley for reasons already stated here. Second, DW has shown and proven that he can find talent, what he hasn't done well was hire good coaches, SM might work out well, let's wait and see. Third, the cap savings will help with OT depth once we eventually release CK. Fourth, this draft is deep at RB, I'm sure they already had a few pegged in the 5th round should this scenario happen. Fifth, JW, didn't show much last year, BUT he was a rookie with very little playing time, most of us were bullish on JW when drafted and there's no reason to not still be. Sixth, the Patriots stacked the deck this year, they ARE going to be every bit as good as last year, if not better on paper, unless something impressive happens with SM as our head coach, the Bills are not beating NE this year. Seventh, and this one is the one I picked up on several times last year watching the sidelines - MG didn't seem to get along with Shady all that well, maybe it was a healthy competitive spirit, maybe it was jealousy, who knows, but there was something between them two that didn't mesh. I say walk, and look elsewhere, the 5th round tender was the better option leading up to FA, IMO. Tim- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 it gets confusing. Pats are a game to game team. So not everyone starts every week, but they all contribute pretty evenly when you look at each persons snap count. Big salaries vs performance. I would argue at this point. That McCoy, Clay, Hughes and Darius arent living up to their contracts. Not to say they arent good. Just that they are all over paid OK.....you can get upset about that if you want as long as you understand it isnt a "bills" thing.....that is a NFL team.....nearly every team in the NFL has player either last year or at some point didnt live up to contracts....... I mean christ......the patriots brought in Albert Haynsworth who bombed with them......nobody is talking about it because the pats win games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris66 Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 I meant their players...Dave said that the reason that many of their picks don't make an impact is that the roster is so difficult to crack. Bill loves veterans on 1 to 2 year contracts. I think Bill looks at the schedule every year and determines what he needs for that season and uses fa accordingly. OK.....you can get upset about that if you want as long as you understand it isnt a "bills" thing.....that is a NFL team.....nearly every team in the NFL has player either last year or at some point didnt live up to contracts....... I mean christ......the patriots brought in Albert Haynsworth who bombed with them......nobody is talking about it because the pats win games. Haynesworth cost tjem a fifth and 500 grand. Low risk didnt workout. Sometimes that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 With foresight, no he wasn't worth a 2nd round tender give his 38 catch, 438 yard average the previous 2 seasons. And no team would have tendered him at the 2nd round level. In hindsight, Goodwin replaced his production. Yeah, no. He was just another receiver in the Cheaters' system. They overpaid him just to get him away from the Bills. The team that paid him 4m a year prob would've considered that there 2.5m tender, doc. Just saying. Who knows how many else. 2.5m for a reliable depth guy is easy. Are you arguing 1.7m was fair compensation? If so, where in that 800k gal do you draw this hard line that no team would cross? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 Bill loves veterans on 1 to 2 year contracts. I think Bill looks at the schedule every year and determines what he needs for that season and uses fa accordingly. Haynesworth cost tjem a fifth and 500 grand. Low risk didnt workout. Sometimes that happens. It does not sway the point that it is not a bills thing where players come in on big contracts that dont live up to performance....... The pats maybe are a bad example I should not have used. They can afford to do things differently because they have a hall of fame qb......lots of teams have this problem in the NFL. Then you have the bottom feeders that have tons of cap space but cant convince anyone to play for them without overpaying...... the bills are a "middling team......their record sits consistantly in the 9-7/8-8 area....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianFan Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 (edited) WHAT, we're not even at 100? it's DAY THREE ALREADY folks - 3 full days! in two days Pats official sign him! LET'S MAKE THIS A 300 PAGE THREAD! YAY! 100 PAGES A DAY COME ON! Edited April 21, 2017 by CanadianFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 (edited) The team that paid him 4m a year prob would've considered that there 2.5m tender, doc. Just saying. Who knows how many else. 2.5m for a reliable depth guy is easy. Are you arguing 1.7m was fair compensation? If so, where in that 800k gal do you draw this hard line that no team would cross? Given that his production his last season in Buffalo (his 5th in the league) was essentially the same as the year before) and that they were primarily a running team with Sammy and Robert ahead of him, I think that putting the lowest tender on him was appropriate and $1.7M was more than fair compensation. No team in the league would have put a 2nd round tender on him. No one. The Cheaters obviously wanted him (did any other team even express interest in him?) and overpaid him to ensure the Bills didn't match the offer. Edited April 21, 2017 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 Given that his production his last season in Buffalo (his 5th in the league) was essentially the same as the year before) and that they were primarily a running team with Sammy and Robert ahead of him, I think that putting the lowest tender on him was appropriate and $1.7M was more than fair compensation. No team in the league would have put a 2nd round tender on him. The Cheaters obviously wanted him and overpaid him to ensure the Bills didn't match the offer. a known to be injured sammy, with an injury that often needs a second surgery, an oft injured goodwin, and really no one other than robert woods. yea, he had some value. and you are arguing that the pats paid him $4m a year to make sure we wouldnt match, but wouldnt have bumped up a tender from 1.7 to 2.5 had they held his rights to make sure no one would match? what guess would you take at what the highest amount a team would tender him at would be if those numbers could be shifted? im so curious how you are drawing these firm lines. are you sure you arent doing that thing where you backed into a corner on a shaky argument and are about to cling to it too tightly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 a known to be injured sammy, with an injury that often needs a second surgery, an oft injured goodwin, and really no one other than robert woods. yea, he had some value. and you are arguing that the pats paid him $4m a year to make sure we wouldnt match, but wouldnt have bumped up a tender from 1.7 to 2.5 had they held his rights to make sure no one would match? what guess would you take at what the highest amount a team would tender him at would be if those numbers could be shifted? im so curious how you are drawing these firm lines. are you sure you arent doing that thing where you backed into a corner on a shaky argument and are about to cling to it too tightly? Just because one team decided to overpay a non-descript WR because they might have thought he was the next Wes Welker and didn't want his former team to match the offer doesn't mean a team should put a 2nd round tender on said player. Talk about a shaky argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 Bump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 Bump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 (edited) Just because one team decided to overpay a non-descript WR because they might have thought he was the next Wes Welker and didn't want his former team to match the offer doesn't mean a team should put a 2nd round tender on said player. Talk about a shaky argument. the guy that's arguing no one WOULD has pivoted to no one SHOULD? Subtle but major shift, no? Edited April 21, 2017 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 21, 2017 Share Posted April 21, 2017 the guy that's arguing no one WOULD has pivoted to no one SHOULD? Subtle but major shift, no? Shift? I said no one would...AND they shouldn't. So I take it you believe the Bills should put a 2nd round tender on every RFA, on the off-chance some team falls in love with that player and tries to sign him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts