Rico Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 Someone posted a figure here of 8.87 mil. as I recall. Of course, this does not in itself make it true. Serious question......do you think that RW will pay this much money to a cornerback, especially given the Bills history of letting corners walk? I am not asking what you would do. I am asking you to predict what RW will do. 308323[/snapback] Hard telling. I would predict that Ralph would be absolutely livid about paying a RT over $9M a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 If Ronde Barber became a Bill in a trade for Henry, I would have a serious case of man love for TD. 308263[/snapback] I am not a Travis hater, but why on earth would TB make this trade? Unless they have some stud back-up CB, it seems that there a RB would be much easier to find, than a front tier CB. Unless Gruden is really throwing the whole thing on the scrap heap, and determined to build from the ground up (if rumours about him trading up to get one of the top QB prospects are true, he may very well be trying to do that), this does not make much sense for the Bucs, IMO. For the Bills, it would be a pretty sweet deal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 Hard telling. I would predict that Ralph would be absolutely livid about paying a RT over $9M a year. 308328[/snapback] Hey, I agree with you. Imo, the biggest dilemma facing the Bills is what to do about Mike Williams and his contract. As far as I know, he is the highest paid RT in the history of the NFL. This is obviously a bad thing, because his play simply does not warrant this type of salary. From where I sit, MW cannot be traded nor cut until after 6/1/06 because of the cap hit for his bonus. My wish is that he plays up to his number, whereas I think blockers are the most important element of a football team, but there is nothing to indicate that he will ever be worth a 9 mil. cap cost. I guess we will know after this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 Hey, I agree with you. Imo, the biggest dilemma facing the Bills is what to do about Mike Williams and his contract. As far as I know, he is the highest paid RT in the history of the NFL. This is obviously a bad thing, because his play simply does not warrant this type of salary. From where I sit, MW cannot be traded nor cut until after 6/1/06 because of the cap hit for his bonus. My wish is that he plays up to his number, whereas I think blockers are the most important element of a football team, but there is nothing to indicate that he will ever be worth a 9 mil. cap cost. I guess we will know after this season. 308341[/snapback] MW's contract from Clumpy's cap analysis page:2005: $4 million salary, $2.17 million bonus amortization, $3 million roster bonus for a cap hit of $9.17 million. He also has a $1.5 million NLTBE incentive that I do not know how he earns. 2006: $4 million salary, $2.17 million bonus amortization, $3 million roster bonus for a cap hit of $9.17 million plus $1.5 million NLTBE. 2007: $5 million salary, $2.17 million bonus amortization plus $3.5 million NLTBE. If you cut him in 2006 before his roster bonus is due, the cap hit is only $4.33M. Slightly more palatable than the $6.5M cap hit this year (with Drew, that would've been $10.833M dead cap money ). I still say if it means keeping Nate, goodbye MW. Actually, unless he turns into the second coming of Erik Williams this year, I'd still have to say goodbye MW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 MW's contract from Clumpy's cap analysis page:2005: $4 million salary, $2.17 million bonus amortization, $3 million roster bonus for a cap hit of $9.17 million. He also has a $1.5 million NLTBE incentive that I do not know how he earns. 2006: $4 million salary, $2.17 million bonus amortization, $3 million roster bonus for a cap hit of $9.17 million plus $1.5 million NLTBE. 2007: $5 million salary, $2.17 million bonus amortization plus $3.5 million NLTBE. If you cut him in 2006 before his roster bonus is due, the cap hit is only $4.33M. Slightly more palatable than the $6.5M cap hit this year (with Drew, that would've been $10.833M dead cap money ). I still say if it means keeping Nate, goodbye MW. Actually, unless he turns into the second coming of Erik Williams this year, I'd still have to say goodbye MW. 308347[/snapback] I completely agree. Erik Williams was the best RT I have ever seen. If MW could play to that level I would be all about keeping, and even extending him. What are the chances? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 MW's contract from Clumpy's cap analysis page:2005: $4 million salary, $2.17 million bonus amortization, $3 million roster bonus for a cap hit of $9.17 million. He also has a $1.5 million NLTBE incentive that I do not know how he earns. 2006: $4 million salary, $2.17 million bonus amortization, $3 million roster bonus for a cap hit of $9.17 million plus $1.5 million NLTBE. 2007: $5 million salary, $2.17 million bonus amortization plus $3.5 million NLTBE. 308347[/snapback] I continued to be amazed by these numbers. I hope the Bills never pick in the top 10 again. Please, somebody convince me that these cap numbers aren't ridiculous because of the way TD chose to structure the contract?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mile High Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 I continued to be amazed by these numbers. I hope the Bills never pick in the top 10 again. Please, somebody convince me that these cap numbers aren't ridiculous because of the way TD chose to structure the contract?? 308354[/snapback] Sorry I can't convince you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 Great reason for not looking into the logic of trading Clements. I not an SEC fan so Carlos Rogers is just a blip in the draft guide. God, if this is what we are down to as Bills fans, how hopeless is our cause?Sorry, he's proven absolutely nothing to me. On the other hand, I've seen what Nate can do on the field. Also, just to inform you on one of the many things I am sure you don't know is that the two easiest positions in the NFL to come in and make an immediate impact are running back and corner, as each position depends more on physical talent and instincts and not as much as knowledge of the game.Unless you are very, very lucky, you're not going to find a CB in any draft that can touch Nate Clements. OTOH, (not to slam MW cause I've acknowledged he's improved BUT) you can get a FA RT like a McDougle any year relatively cheap whose performance will not be much different than MW's...at least compared to what he has shown us so far. So, you would give up a developing offensive tackle to sign a one year tender offer for a CB who will be gone the following year anyways.In a heartbeat. If you show Nate the $$$, he won't leave in a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BravinSeattle Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 You franchise him if necessary, but you don't give up a Nate Clements.Who TF is Carlos f'n Rogers? Next year, Drew's dead cap $$$ comes off the books, then rework MW's contract... dump him if you must, but pay Nate what he deserves. 308272[/snapback] Yeah...that sure worked out well for Oakland. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 Yeah...that sure worked out well for Oakland. LOL 308530[/snapback] Paying Mike Williams $9+M a year is sure working out well for Buffalo. LOL NEWS FLASH: Charles Woodson is no Nate Clements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRH Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 Look, I don't think anyone believes TB would do a straight-up Henry-for-Barber deal. But try this on for size: We trade Clements to Washington for the #9 pick. We then take that pick and trade down for a package of picks, starting in the late first round and probably also including a second and a third or a fourth. Then we take one of those picks, maybe even our original #55, and trade it with Henry to TB for Barber. Washington gets a topflight corner/return man for its #9 pick. TB gets a starting running back and a second-round pick for Barber. We get an outstanding cornerback, a first-round pick, a second-round pick to replace the one we lost, and an extra pick in either the third or fourth round. And we lose (1) a guy who is walking next year no matter what (don't kid yourselves), and (2) a guy who is a lot more valuable to someone else than he is to us. Flame away, but I'm just thinking out loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jokeman Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 Here's the base salaries for the 5 highest paid CBs for 2006: Bailey, Roland CB Denver Broncos $5.5 million Plummer, Ahmed CB San Francisco 49ers $5.5 million McAlister, Chris CB Baltimore Ravens $5.5 million Winfield, Antoine CB Minnesota Vikings $4.7 million Glenn, Aaron CB Houston Texans $4.25 million Which averages to $5.09 as the least Nate would count against the cap (if franchised and signed with no signing bonus) but considering signing bonus and length of contract it be safe to say Clements would probably count about $6.25 million (ie about $3.75 million more then he counts against the cap this season) against our cap if we do franchise and re-sign him unless we can give him a bigger bonus and smaller base salaries in 2007 etc. For those that want Rhonde Barber, his base salaries for the next two seasons are $3.75 million and $3.50 for a point of reference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts