Buffalo Barbarian Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 4 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said: ....so the Coleman Era is over?............. Did it ever start lol. 32 minutes ago, Captain_Quint said: Damn Strait !! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 58 minutes ago, cba fan said: They must keep money back for injury replacements, if the right player comes available, and strategic players extensions. They can also carry it over for next year. But I am off topic. Dickelyjones asked "did it come at any costs besides ownership's pockets?" Yes it did. My point is it has nothing to do with money coming out of owners pockets. All contracts and player salaries are fixed to the salary cap over the long haul. Only thing that changes is sometimes the cap is spent earlier than the year it is applied and spending it in any year reduces money available to improve the team in said year. Not sure I'm following you. CC's $3.5M is charged to this year's cap only. And there were no better options available for that amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenseWins Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 I almost feel sorry for Cleveland. Imagine that first Josh Gordon rips your heart out and then you draft Coleman and he finishes the job... SAD... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cba fan Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 (edited) 10 hours ago, Doc said: Not sure I'm following you. CC's $3.5M is charged to this year's cap only. And there were no better options available for that amount. Yes that was applied to this years cap. Not sure why you are asking that. I agreed with that as my post basically said: all contracts are applied either earlier or later depending how the contract is executed and finished and money is spent either earlier or later depending on the terms of the contract in relation to the cap rules IE: sign bonus etc etc...…..and over the long haul all teams spend the same total as the salary cap is set. Fluctuations would be as teams have prorated contracts come due due to trades and cuts and sign bonuses etc etc.........some teams spend more cash yearly due to sign bonuses but then that is applied to a latter salary cap year and is why teams spend more than others some years and less in others. It all evens out over the long haul. Example: If NFL decided the salary cap would be abolished in 10 years. All the teams would have to spend all the accumulated surpluses they have built up by then. At the end of the cap all teams would have *spent roughly the same amount over the salary cap period.(*not to confuse but they all must spend at least 95% of the cap. So there is a little leeway for frugal teams to pocket a little cash like Ralphs Bills and Browns Bengals did all the time) Yes there were many better options available for a 3.5 mill salary cap hit for Corey Coleman. Better options costing little would have been Streater and Reilley and Kerley. And really any low cost option would have been better than a 3.5 mill cap hit for nothing to show right now, if you are going to cut him so soon. If you make that kind of cap hit investment you give the guy longer than a couple of weeks to develop. Of course that is easy to see now that he has been cut by Bills and we have the luxury of going back in time to make that statement. At the time it seemed like a good chance and myself after making that investment I would not have cut him. I would have let him develop for half to a whole year before cutting bait. Especially since Chris Brown not so eloquently explained he is not a book learner and needs physical reps to understand. Edited September 30, 2018 by cba fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 15 minutes ago, cba fan said: Yes that was applied to this years cap. Not sure why you are asking that. I agreed with that as my post basically said: all contracts are applied either earlier or later depending how the contract is executed and finished and money is spent either earlier or later depending on the terms of the contract in relation to the cap rules IE: sign bonus etc etc...…..and over the long haul all teams spend the same total as the salary cap is set. Fluctuations would be as teams have prorated contracts come due due to trades and cuts and sign bonuses etc etc.........some teams spend more cash yearly due to sign bonuses but then that is applied to a latter salary cap year and is why teams spend more than others some years and less in others. It all evens out over the long haul. Example: If NFL decided the salary cap would be abolished in 10 years. All the teams would have to spend all the accumulated surpluses they have built up by then. At the end of the cap all teams would have *spent roughly the same amount over the salary cap period.(*not to confuse but they all must spend at least 95% of the cap. So there is a little leeway for frugal teams to pocket a little cash like Ralphs Bills and Browns Bengals did all the time) Yes there were many better options available for a 3.5 mill salary cap hit for Corey Coleman. Better options costing little would have been Streater and Reilley and Kerley. And really any low cost option would have been better than a 3.5 mill cap hit for nothing to show right now, if you are going to cut him so soon. If you make that kind of cap hit investment you give the guy longer than a couple of weeks to develop. Of course that is easy to see now that he has been cut by Bills and we have the luxury of going back in time to make that statement. At the time it seemed like a good chance and myself after making that investment I would not have cut him. I would have let him develop for half to a whole year before cutting bait. Especially since Chris Brown not so eloquently explained he is not a book learner and needs physical reps to understand. They took a look at the receivers on the roster... And tried to upgrade them. He had raw abilities that we needed, especially speed. He was acquired for basically nothing meaning cutting him was never off the table. We can't complain about how bad the receivers are and not acknowledge them trying to get some talent in there. Not keeping him shows to me that he doesn't get it, and with all his talent he can't put it together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 5 minutes ago, dneveu said: They took a look at the receivers on the roster... And tried to upgrade them. He had raw abilities that we needed, especially speed. He was acquired for basically nothing meaning cutting him was never off the table. We can't complain about how bad the receivers are and not acknowledge them trying to get some talent in there. Not keeping him shows to me that he doesn't get it, and with all his talent he can't put it together. The point is, he was not acquired for "basically nothing". He was acquired for $3.5M in guaranteed salary. I had no quarrel with taking a shot at Coleman as a potential upgrade at WR. But unless he was snorting lines in the locker room (in which case, get him suspended and get cap relief) it made no sense to throw down $3.5M for less than a month of try-out. Either give the guy a meaningful audition - or take your shot at less cap intensive talent. If they didn't know what his learning style and attitude were before they made that trade, they need better intel gathering in their pro personnel department. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 5 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: The point is, he was not acquired for "basically nothing". He was acquired for $3.5M in guaranteed salary. I had no quarrel with taking a shot at Coleman as a potential upgrade at WR. But unless he was snorting lines in the locker room (in which case, get him suspended and get cap relief) it made no sense to throw down $3.5M for less than a month of try-out. Either give the guy a meaningful audition - or take your shot at less cap intensive talent. If they didn't know what his learning style and attitude were before they made that trade, they need better intel gathering in their pro personnel department. The cost for taking a gamble on a former first round receiver was certainly for more than nothing, as you have repeatedly pointed out. What was the consequence for that expenditure? Little to nothing. The Bills were in a cap position to take a chance on this player who so far has turned out to be a bust for a few teams. His cap hit for this year was easily and comfortably absorbed. So what is the big deal? Although in hindsight it can be said that this transaction was a mistake. To the Bills credit they objectively evaluated his value and at the cost of a minor cap ding they kept the talent that they had. You act as if this transaction that didn't work out crippled this team. It didn't. In actuality the consequence of it was inconsequential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 19 minutes ago, JohnC said: You act as if this transaction that didn't work out crippled this team. It didn't. In actuality the consequence of it was inconsequential. I wish I found trout that rose to a fly as surely as you do. I'm not "acting" anything much less making the contention it "crippled the team". That's entirely your straw man projection. At least you seem to have given over referring to $3.5M as "peanuts" or whatever your word was. I will point out that in a year with limited remaining cap, it seems a strange decision to tie up 27% of our remaining free cap on a guy we kept for less than a month. It's as if they didn't know he was a behind-the-scenes disaster, but that's the job of a pro-personnel department, to gather that intel and know. We seem to be signing guys who've got a resume' (first round pick, former all-pro etc) without enough care to look under the hood at what they can actually do right now. I can think of 4. That seems a valid concern looking forward to next year. 19 minutes ago, JohnC said: The cost for taking a gamble on a former first round receiver was certainly for more than nothing, as you have repeatedly pointed out. What was the consequence for that expenditure? Little to nothing. The Bills were in a cap position to take a chance on this player who so far has turned out to be a bust for a few teams. His cap hit for this year was easily and comfortably absorbed. So what is the big deal? The truth is neither you nor I have no idea if it's inconsequential or not, because you (and I) have no idea what trade deals or other signings the Bills passed up or may still have to pass up now that an additional $3.5M (now $2.9M) fluttered out the door onto the Bills dead cap heap like so many little birdies and cut our available cap by 27%. What we do both know is that coaching time and snaps are both limited - a zero-sum game. If one guy is getting them, another guy isn't. So ultimately team success rides on our FO's ability to bring in guys who reward and make good use of that time, not waste it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 11 hours ago, Doc said: Not sure I'm following you. CC's $3.5M is charged to this year's cap only. And there were no better options available for that amount. Id venture that somewhere through the offseason we could’ve spent it better. Or carried it over. to make that trade and accept that contract you have to give the dude a pretty long leash. You know he’s going to be a handful out of the gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 1 hour ago, cba fan said: Yes that was applied to this years cap. Not sure why you are asking that. I agreed with that as my post basically said: all contracts are applied either earlier or later depending how the contract is executed and finished and money is spent either earlier or later depending on the terms of the contract in relation to the cap rules IE: sign bonus etc etc...…..and over the long haul all teams spend the same total as the salary cap is set. Fluctuations would be as teams have prorated contracts come due due to trades and cuts and sign bonuses etc etc.........some teams spend more cash yearly due to sign bonuses but then that is applied to a latter salary cap year and is why teams spend more than others some years and less in others. It all evens out over the long haul. Example: If NFL decided the salary cap would be abolished in 10 years. All the teams would have to spend all the accumulated surpluses they have built up by then. At the end of the cap all teams would have *spent roughly the same amount over the salary cap period.(*not to confuse but they all must spend at least 95% of the cap. So there is a little leeway for frugal teams to pocket a little cash like Ralphs Bills and Browns Bengals did all the time) Yes there were many better options available for a 3.5 mill salary cap hit for Corey Coleman. Better options costing little would have been Streater and Reilley and Kerley. And really any low cost option would have been better than a 3.5 mill cap hit for nothing to show right now, if you are going to cut him so soon. If you make that kind of cap hit investment you give the guy longer than a couple of weeks to develop. Of course that is easy to see now that he has been cut by Bills and we have the luxury of going back in time to make that statement. At the time it seemed like a good chance and myself after making that investment I would not have cut him. I would have let him develop for half to a whole year before cutting bait. Especially since Chris Brown not so eloquently explained he is not a book learner and needs physical reps to understand. Kerley and Reilly are still out there and could be brought back. Streater could have been kept but they were trying to give CC a chance and I don't think he played ST's. As for the roll-over, the Bills have $90M next year and they're unlikely to use a good chunk of it and probably roll that over. 25 minutes ago, NoSaint said: Id venture that somewhere through the offseason we could’ve spent it better. Or carried it over. to make that trade and accept that contract you have to give the dude a pretty long leash. You know he’s going to be a handful out of the gate. The fact that they did cut him despite trading a pick and giving him $3.5M tells me a lot about CC. And the Cheaters invested almost nothing in him and cut him...twice and even from their PS where they could have developed him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 7 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: I wish I found trout that rose to a fly as surely as you do. I'm not "acting" anything much less making the contention it "crippled the team". That's entirely your straw man projection. At least you seem to have given over referring to $3.5M as "peanuts" or whatever your word was. I will point out that in a year with limited remaining cap, it seems a strange decision to tie up 27% of our remaining free cap on a guy we kept for less than a month. It's as if they didn't know he was a behind-the-scenes disaster, but that's the job of a pro-personnel department, to gather that intel and know. We seem to be signing guys who've got a resume' (first round pick, former all-pro etc) without enough care to look under the hood at what they can actually do right now. I can think of 4. That seems a valid concern looking forward to next year. The truth is neither you nor I have no idea if it's inconsequential or not, because you (and I) have no idea what trade deals or other signings the Bills passed up or may still have to pass up now that an additional $3.5M (now $2.9M) fluttered out the door onto the Bills dead cap heap like so many little birdies and cut our available cap by 27%. What we do both know is that coaching time and snaps are both limited - a zero-sum game. If one guy is getting them, another guy isn't. So ultimately team success rides on our FO's ability to bring in guys who reward and make good use of that time, not waste it. We are going in circles in this issue. You consider the signing and the price more consequential than I do. The regime took a look at a former first round receiver who possessed an attribute that they felt they lacked i.e. speed. It didn't work out. The $3.5 M that was lost in cap space this year had little bearing on how this roster was going to be constituted. If it was a cap hit for next year I would be more sympathetic to your position. The Bills are absorbing more than $50 M in cap space this year to be in a better situation next year and future years. Any team that has a large turnover and makes a large number of transactions is not going to have them all work out. That's the nature of business. If you want to wallow in grievance over this transaction that clearly was a failure then continue on. I'm not so bothered by this transaction. I'm more bothered by the cutting of salary of Incognito resulting in him leaving. For me it was an issue of a loss of talent on an offensive line that has a dearth of talent. But even in that case we don't know if there is a back story because he is such a mercurial person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 ...now from the Giants' PS to their active 53......wish I was his travel agent..Jesus........... Giants signed Corey Coleman off their practice squad. Cut twice by the Patriots last month after being traded by the Browns and waived by the Bills earlier this year, Coleman might have finally found a place he can stick around. The rebuilding Giants are thin behind Odell Beckham and Sterling Shepard, so it makes sense to see what Coleman can do. The 2016 first-round pick has 56 career catches for 718 yards and five touchdowns. Source: Jordan Raanan on Twitter Oct 25 - 9:01 AM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 25, 2018 Author Share Posted October 25, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts