Jump to content

Bills restructure Diggs contract; create 7.8. Mill in cap space


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Canadian Bills Fan said:

 

 

I know but I think of Tyreek Hill who said "once Im signed, Im signed" and that he wouldnt restructure 

 

Nice to not have that problem 

Well, that's Hill not helping himself and showing that he's a moron more than anything. If you don't accept, it means you are intentionally hampering your team for no reason. If my work said, "here's your entire year's wages" I'd say yes too.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, McBean said:

I thought Diggs was a selfish prick and not a good teammate?

 

I mean, he's not, but getting multiple years worth of pay in one bonus certainly doesn't hurt. Restructuring like this helps team get cap space. They help players by getting their money faster and putting dead money on the books if they get cut.

 

Either way, we certainly want him here a long time and getting cap space certainly doesn't hurt.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Boxcar said:

People are interpreting the restructuring as Diggs doing something for the good of the team, which isn't really true.

I think it has more to do with the idea that he's not making noise about being the 19th highest paid WR (or whatever the actual number is) while it's happening.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Boxcar said:

They just gave him his entire salary in one go. He didn't sacrifice anything.

 

Not to say Diggs is selfish or anything like that, but in this instance it is actually beneficial to the player.

I may be wrong, but I believe signing bonuses would be taxed at a higher rate rather than salary? Either way - restructuring is always a player doing the team a favor in my eyes. This is huge!

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Disagree 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Conlan58 said:

I may be wrong, but I believe signing bonuses would be taxed at a higher rate rather than salary? Either way - restructuring is always a player doing the team a favor in my eyes. This is huge!

 

I was going to say the same....from a tax standpoint not in favor of SD......def team benefit there.  I am sure the Bills WILL take care of him going forward.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Conlan58 said:

I may be wrong, but I believe signing bonuses would be taxed at a higher rate rather than salary? Either way - restructuring is always a player doing the team a favor in my eyes. This is huge!

 

 

There are some re-structures that don't require the approval of the player.

 

It's just accounting.

 

This may be one of them.   

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, aceman_16 said:

Well....I am torn between getting a player this year OR save it for next year to help with Allen's and Edmund's contracts.

The cap savings is only for this season so not sure it affect Josh or Edmunds, I have to believe we're adding a player or two maybe Ertz or Steven Nelson. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, atlbillsfan1975 said:

Ditto.

 

Whatever Beane does with the cash is fine by me. I trust our GM, he is a man with a plan. 

Remember when previous holders of the position would have spent it on drinks, dinner, and dancing? 😁

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kwai San said:

 

I was going to say the same....from a tax standpoint not in favor of SD......def team benefit there.  I am sure the Bills WILL take care of him going forward.....

There is no difference in tax rate for a salary vs a bonus

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, aceman_16 said:

Well....I am torn between getting a player this year OR save it for next year to help with Allen's and Edmund's contracts.

I could be wrong but I don't imagine they would do this for Allen or Edmunds' extensions b/c those would likely be structured to not change 2021 at all and even lower the 2022 hit (since the high caps will almost certainly be there in '23 and beyond). This might not be for any major moves (although none of Ertz, Nelson, or Sherman would surprise me) and might just be for maneuverablility and for the just-in-case (someone they can't pass on) becomes available today.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...