PIZ Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 Who could they be trading for? Hopefully not Clements. 9. Washington Redskins — CB Carlos Rogers, AuburnA trade is said to be in the works that could go down in the next few days and affect the Redskins’ draft needs. The Redskins prefer established veterans over rookies. Rogers’ size, speed and experience could make him the first defender drafted. PFW Mock Draft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 Interesting. Add to that the fact that the 'Skins have been hosting WR draftees: http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20050410-124201-2820r.htm I think a Clements deal may be in the works afterall, netting us a 2nd and 4th this year and a 1st next year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 Interesting. Add to that the fact that the 'Skins have been hosting WR draftees: http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20050410-124201-2820r.htm I think a Clements deal may be in the works afterall, netting us a 2nd and 4th this year and a 1st next year... 301384[/snapback] What good reason would TD have for trading NC THIS year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 Interesting. Add to that the fact that the 'Skins have been hosting WR draftees: http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20050410-124201-2820r.htm I think a Clements deal may be in the works afterall, netting us a 2nd and 4th this year and a 1st next year... 301384[/snapback] if your getting the bulk of compensation in next year's draft, why not just wait until next year to do the deal and get another season of high caliber play out of him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 What good reason would TD have for trading NC THIS year? 301387[/snapback] Because Joe NC is a UFA after 05. The "tag and trade" thing that worked so well with Peerless is less of an option this time. The Raiders tried this with Woodson who promptly signed the offer. Now, the Raiders are stuck with a 10 million dollar, no-cut contract for a cornerback, who will be a UFA once again in 06. It has been posted here that NC would cost almost 9 mil if franchised. This seems way to risky imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark VI Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 if your getting the bulk of compensation in next year's draft, why not just wait until next year to do the deal and get another season of high caliber play out of him? 301392[/snapback] He's a UFA next year. Franchise him and his salary is suddenly 10 Mil. I'm sure people will be lining up at the door to pay him that....not. Look at the Raiders, completely hung with the Charles Woodson Franchise salary now. They are desperate to trade. No takers. Next years draft is far stronger in the Blue-Chip prospect department. Lots of LT's and a far stronger overall pool, according to Ourlads scouting. Let's see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 If the Bills make this deal, the Bills are starting to become the Oakland A's of the NFL: Lets be successful, deal our best players for younger ones and hope to stay competitive in a NFL CAP enviroment to boot. Now I know the A's have made the playoffs a few times, so its not a perfect comparision, but i hope you all understand where Im going with that comment. I thought the cap was supposed to TOALLY even things out? Gue$$ not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 He's a UFA next year. Franchise him and his salary is suddenly 10 Mil. I'm sure people will be lining up at the door to pay him that....not. Look at the Raiders, completely hung with the Charles Woodson Franchise salary now. They are desperate to trade. No takers. Next years draft is far stronger in the Blue-Chip prospect department. Lots of LT's and a far stronger overall pool, according to Ourlads scouting. Let's see what happens. 301412[/snapback] no team would have to pay clements 10M........they simply would sign him to a long-term deal and his cap charge drops 50-70% to the 3-5M range........same would apply to the bills if they signed him long-term....... the charles woodson situation is far from over.......they are waiting for the best deal to emerge (much like the bills are with travis henry, and i don't see many on this board being critical of that strategy).........when all i said and done they will trade him for SOMETHING and they will recoup all their cap space........i would not be shocked at all to see a trade go down on draft day involving darren howard/charles woodson, as that is where the rumours are headed now......and whoever does trade for woodson will work out a long-term deal with him to get that cap charge down...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 If the Bills make this deal, the Bills are starting to become the Oakland A's of the NFL: Lets be successful, deal our best players for younger ones and hope to stay competitive in a NFL CAP enviroment to boot. Now I know the A's have made the playoffs a few times, so its not a perfect comparision, but i hope you all understand where Im going with that comment. I thought the cap was supposed to TOALLY even things out? Gue$$ not 301417[/snapback] excellent point and comparison.......a's are making the best of an uneven system, but the NFL cap does level the playing field and their is no reason for the bills not to retain their good, young talent.........nate has earned his contract and deserves to be paid, and the bills should not hesitate to do so (in fact, they should have done it a year ago and got him at a cheaper rate, as the eagles do with good, young talent)........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 If the Bills make this deal, the Bills are starting to become the Oakland A's of the NFL: Lets be successful, deal our best players for younger ones and hope to stay competitive in a NFL CAP enviroment to boot. Now I know the A's have made the playoffs a few times, so its not a perfect comparision, but i hope you all understand where Im going with that comment. I thought the cap was supposed to TOALLY even things out? Gue$$ not 301417[/snapback] Very good post. The truth is, TD has a tougher job than a GM with a wealthier owner. Snyder seems to get almost any player he wants despite the cap. As we have seen, it does not always translate into wins. Imo, the debate does center around whether a team is willing to be non-nompetitive for a few years and THEN make a serious run, or if the goal is to always field a solid if unspectacular team. I consider the post dynasty Steelers a good example of the latter. Something to consider is the fact that RW appears to need high attendance figures to make a profit, and Paul Allen for example does not even need to make a profit. Big difference. In recent years where the Bills were not playing well, the attendance reflected it, and again, the gate seems to matter a ton to RW. Simon floated the possibility of starting a thread as to these two varying approaches of field a winning team. I hope he does, because it is an interesting topic, and Simon is an interesting guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 excellent point and comparison.......a's are making the best of an uneven system, but the NFL cap does level the playing field and their is no reason for the bills not to retain their good, young talent.........nate has earned his contract and deserves to be paid, and the bills should not hesitate to do so (in fact, they should have done it a year ago and got him at a cheaper rate, as the eagles do with good, young talent)........ 301424[/snapback] As usual, you're wrong - even within the salary cap there are market inefficiencies. Teams overvalue and overpay for skill players (such as WR, QB and CB), and undervalue and underpay for interior linemen, linebackers, safeties, etc. That's why the Pats have been successful - they've loaded up on versatile, undervalued players. That's exactly what the Bills ought to do - rather than pay Clements $7 mil + per year, pay a rook from a strong CB draft class $1-$2 mil per year for 4-6 years. The fact is, the value of Clements' performance versus that rook isn't proportional to the difference in their respective contracts. The A's philosophy is to remain competitive for the long-term, rather than for 2-3 year "spurts." That should be the Bills' philosophy as well, regardless of the salary cap. Trading Clements for a #2 and #4 in this year's draft, plus a #1 in next year's, will promote long-term success and allow the Bills flexibility under the cap. It's a risky move- but the right one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 As usual, you're wrong - even within the salary cap there are market inefficiencies. Teams overvalue and overpay for skill players (such as WR, QB and CB), and undervalue and underpay for interior linemen, linebackers, safeties, etc. That's why the Pats have been successful - they've loaded up on versatile, undervalued players. That's exactly what the Bills ought to do - rather than pay Clements $7 mil + per year, pay a rook from a strong CB draft class $1-$2 mil per year for 4-6 years. The fact is, the value of Clements' performance versus that rook isn't proportional to the difference in their respective contracts. The A's philosophy is to remain competitive for the long-term, rather than for 2-3 year "spurts." That should be the Bills' philosophy as well, regardless of the salary cap. Trading Clements for a #2 and #4 in this year's draft, plus a #1 in next year's, will promote long-term success and allow the Bills flexibility under the cap. It's a risky move- but the right one. 301435[/snapback] so do you believe the eagles are foolish for locking up their good, young CB's with big money deals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 so do you believe the eagles are foolish for locking up their good, young CB's with big money deals? 301437[/snapback] No - because the two of them COMBINED make what Clements will demand individually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 no team would have to pay clements 10M........they simply would sign him to a long-term deal and his cap charge drops 50-70% to the 3-5M range........same would apply to the bills if they signed him long-term....... the charles woodson situation is far from over.......they are waiting for the best deal to emerge (much like the bills are with travis henry, and i don't see many on this board being critical of that strategy).........when all i said and done they will trade him for SOMETHING and they will recoup all their cap space........i would not be shocked at all to see a trade go down on draft day involving darren howard/charles woodson, as that is where the rumours are headed now......and whoever does trade for woodson will work out a long-term deal with him to get that cap charge down...... 301422[/snapback] With all due respect, I think that you are wrong about Woodson. He can make 10 mil this season, and have a huge payday once again in 06. There is NO incentive for him to renegotiate, or so I see it. I will admit that this is the first situation I can recall in which a player was seemingly happy about getting tagged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 No - because the two of them COMBINED make what Clements will demand individually. 301441[/snapback] lito sheppard -- $25M over 5 years - $9M signing bonus sheldon brown -- $30M over 6 years - $7.5M signing bonus so you believe clements will sign a deal averaging $10M a year with a $16.5M signing bonus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 With all due respect, I think that you are wrong about Woodson. He can make 10 mil this season, and have a huge payday once again in 06. There is NO incentive for him to renegotiate, or so I see it. I will admit that this is the first situation I can recall in which a player was seemingly happy about getting tagged. 301446[/snapback] we shall see very soon bill.......the draft is fast approaching and that is the time a deal will get done, if it does get done.......i think woodson does have motivation being that a signing bonus would exceed his f-tag value and he has gone on record stating he wants out of oakland..... if oakland does pull this off a lot of people on this board need to tip their cap to them, as many have called them out for this move........if it pays dividends, it looks even better then the peerless tag and trade........if they don't, the critics are justified......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 ELUDE = to avoid capture ALLUDE = to make reference to. Sorry for being a prick about words, but it's really becoming a problem that threatens our ability to compete globally. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/c...sinessesdeclare Some of you laugh or get P.O'd by people who correct grammer and spelling, but some of these people have college diplomas! PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalofan72 Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 lito sheppard -- $25M over 5 years - $9M signing bonussheldon brown -- $30M over 6 years - $7.5M signing bonus so you believe clements will sign a deal averaging $10M a year with a $16.5M signing bonus? 301460[/snapback] yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 PAY THE MAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 With all due respect, I think that you are wrong about Woodson. He can make 10 mil this season, and have a huge payday once again in 06. There is NO incentive for him to renegotiate, or so I see it. I will admit that this is the first situation I can recall in which a player was seemingly happy about getting tagged. 301446[/snapback] You are assuming that no other team is interested in Woodson. The only thing that Woodson did by signing the tender offer was tick off the Raiders & possibly lowered the trade return (but likely not by much) I loved when everyone jumped on the story that he screwed their cap, without actually analyzing the situation. Woodosn signing the tender had zero impact on their cap. His FP tag counted towards the cap whether he signed or not. Hate to agree with d-wag, but Raiders are just waiting for the best suitor. There is definite interest in Woodson, and a trade will happen, but some of the leverage has been taken off the Raiders. Ironically, having Clements on the market is not good for Bills, because Woodson is out there. Why would Gibbs/Snyder trade a boatload for Clements, when they know that a better CB is on the block and needs to be dealt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts