Kirby Jackson Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 14 hours ago, MAJBobby said: For this Hypothetical I will use giving Kirk Cousins over 110M with Big Guaranteed money and this package to get to 1 or 2 overall (three 1s and one 2 and maybe a 4th) so lets say both miss and bust out what sets the Franchise back more Spending huge Money on a UFA QB and them busting or Spending multiple picks to get your rookie and he busts. Which carries more of an inherent risk to the team, FO and Coaching staff? This is a really interesting thought!! I have no idea which is worse. I would guess the picks if the contract is structured right. Even if you had to take a $20M cap hit in one year I think that it’s easier to fix than the loss of all of those assets and be in the same place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 The impact of both is overblown. The rookie wage scale took a lot of the sting out of missing on your high picks. The various different ways teams structure contracts lessens the impact of a bad signing. Draft well on average, don't continually screw up when negotiating deals, this isn't the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Real McClappy Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 3 hours ago, Rochesterfan said: I think it depends - the FA bust you see sooner and if the team can adapt - it is a waste of money, but as we have seen - money can move and you can move on. If you bust in the draft - it is less financial capital, but you hurt the team longer term with the loss of multiple players and typically it is 2+ years of solid playing time to solidify the bust status -so they lose more games. Therfore if a staff is on the hot seat - think Chicago- and you bust on a FA - your Time is done because of the choice. If a staff is new and relatively safe -they survive that mistake with a shot to still draft or acquire another QB. We see it play out both ways with teams like LAR, Ten, and TB drafting guys and then changing coach to try and salvage the QBs. We also see teams like Chicago that busted on a FA. The interesting place is Houston that busted on a big time FA in Brock, but the HC kept his job - I believe it cost the GM his, but they did not see eye to eye. So as I said it mostly lies with how stable the franchise is and how stable the staff is, but a bust either way can cost you. It took Houston about 1 year to revive from that UFA-Brock mess. Chicago basically did the same thing I pointed too earlier with Glennon and Trubisky (not fool prrof but gives your another option). It really depends on who the UFA QB is IMO. Brock and Glennon to me were both crap and not worth the silly contracts they received. Cousins in this scenario is way more established than either one of those guys. Do the Bills make the playoffs this year with him at the helm if here all year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmur66 Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 (edited) A) Got no time to screw around. If you can get Cousins you do it. I like him. He is a proven field general and you could build a team around him. I can see he and McD joined at the hip. Cousins and maybe Case Keenum are the only QB's I'd want. B) Trade up to get a top QB prospect means giving up all that draft capital, developing him for a year or two and hoping he is the guy. Kinda like the Rams did. I don't recall if they traded up for Goff. C) The other option is to let a QB fall to us and develop him behind someone like Alex Smith. I quess it all depends on who is available and how patient you can be. I think patience is in short supply at OBD and scenario A is most preferred. As far as which flop would hurt the team more? It don't matter. It's about time and winning now. They get a whole new clip of cash increasing in size every year and people are paid big bucks to figure it out. Edited December 31, 2017 by bmur66 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richardb1952 Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 Depends on the "guaranteed big money" but even at 60 million, most of that will be gone in two years that is not bonus money. Losing (3) 1's, a 2 and a later round pick would be harder to recover from. At least if the UFA QB is a bust you can start looking for his replacement the next year. Giving up all that for a draft pick means you are "all in" for at least 3 - 4 years. Even though Bills only used a first round pick for E.J., they were still committed to him for too long. I'd always be tempted to go with a proven vet in this case as long as the vet has the probability to be productive for the next 4 - 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Now Moment Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 40 minutes ago, bmur66 said: A) Got no time to screw around. If you can get Cousins you do it. I like him. He is a proven field general and you could build a team around him. I can see he and McD joined at the hip. Cousins and maybe Case Keenum are the only QB's I'd want. B) Trade up to get a top QB prospect means giving up all that draft capital, developing him for a year or two and hoping he is the guy. Kinda like the Rams did. I don't recall if they traded up for Goff. C) The other option is to let a QB fall to us and develop him behind someone like Alex Smith. I quess it all depends on who is available and how patient you can be. I think patience is in short supply at OBD and scenario A is most preferred. As far as which flop would hurt the team more? It don't matter. It's about time and winning now. They get a whole new clip of cash increasing in size every year and people are paid big bucks to figure it out. The Rams and the Eagles traded up for their QBs. I do disagree that it does matter which flop will hurt the team more. It's not exactly easy to get out of a 100 million dollar deal. Would hurt this team for years but a rookie with the scale in place, wouldn't make much of a dent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 With the free agent you still have all those draft picks to build a good team around him, so doesn't set you back as much. Theoretically you'd then have more $ to spend in free agency, but it's much harder IMO to build a team that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmur66 Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 I hear ya Buffalo30 but I just think it's all about time in a win now league. The money is just play money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 Make that Cousins contract one that can be exited after 3 years. I don’t think Cousins is going to be brutal and with the picks you can build the team. If Cousins does stink or gets injured you get him mostly off the books in four years. Then you can pay your players who are coming up for FA from this draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJBobby Posted December 31, 2017 Author Share Posted December 31, 2017 2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: This is a really interesting thought!! I have no idea which is worse. I would guess the picks if the contract is structured right. Even if you had to take a $20M cap hit in one year I think that it’s easier to fix than the loss of all of those assets and be in the same place. The reason i ask is there are ways to recoup the assets as well very easy. However to have a Owner take a 60M sting in his pocket book i think puts more pressure on the GM and Coach getting it right because afterall these owners are businessmen in the business of making money i just think a GM can survive a couple of draft busts even with alot of capital involved. I dont think they can survive big money UFA busts Although with Terry and Kim the money inpact might not be as bad as with other owners. Look at how much money they are paying people not to work for them or to play for their teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, MAJBobby said: The reason i ask is there are ways to recoup the assets as well very easy. However to have a Owner take a 60M sting in his pocket book i think puts more pressure on the GM and Coach getting it right because afterall these owners are businessmen in the business of making money i just think a GM can survive a couple of draft busts even with alot of capital involved. I dont think they can survive big money UFA busts Although with Terry and Kim the money inpact might not be as bad as with other owners. Look at how much money they are paying people not to work for them or to play for their teams. Yeah, I was applying it to the Bills. I don’t think that squandering money bothers Pegula as much as losing. You can eat money (like they did with Dareus) and still compete. It’s hard to compete if you blow all of those draft picks. Great topic @MAJBobby!! Edited December 31, 2017 by Kirby Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 Ultimately I think the answer lies in how the Bills did with those draft picks if they brought in Cousins. If they hit on most of them the setback from a Cousin's "bust" would be heavily mitigated. Sure they'd lose lots of money in guaranteed but that would be offset with quality young players playing on their rookie contract. However, if they missed on those picks then Cousins not panning out and those picks failing would kill the Bills for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rochesterfan Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 28 minutes ago, MAJBobby said: The reason i ask is there are ways to recoup the assets as well very easy. However to have a Owner take a 60M sting in his pocket book i think puts more pressure on the GM and Coach getting it right because afterall these owners are businessmen in the business of making money i just think a GM can survive a couple of draft busts even with alot of capital involved. I dont think they can survive big money UFA busts Although with Terry and Kim the money inpact might not be as bad as with other owners. Look at how much money they are paying people not to work for them or to play for their teams. Considering he is still paying big money to several coaches and GMs - I do not think money is a big issue with this owner. If It was a guarantee- I think the Pegula’s would pay almost anything for a winner, but nothing is guaranteed- so I still think for this organization - missing on picks would be worse because that would cause issues for several years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJBobby Posted December 31, 2017 Author Share Posted December 31, 2017 (edited) 46 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Yeah, I was applying it to the Bills. I don’t think that squandering money bothers Pegula as much as losing. You can eat money (like they did with Dareus) and still compete. It’s hard to compete if you blow all of those draft picks. Great topic @MAJBobby!! Appreciate it. Yeah i hear you about pegulas. They are and have laid oit alot of money for people not to work for them. I guess it really does depend on your ownership group. It just seems to me that the more conservative owner the less they play in UFA same with FO tye more conservative groups tend to stay away from big money acquisitions however i guess a QB might be a different animal Edited December 31, 2017 by MAJBobby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts