James Cook absent from OTA's

[DrDawkinstein]

25 minutes ago, qwksilver said:

That's my point. With the cap going up 10+ million every year why bicker about 2.5 per.

 

Even more to your point, literally $25M per year now that streaming is involved.

 

[RoscoeParrish]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I think Edwards will walk after this year. The thing that stopped him getting good FA money when he left the Rams was injury. He has always been a good NFL starting guard, but he struggled staying healthy in his time there. If he plays a full year in 2025 to back up a full year in 2024 and continues to be a kind of 7/10 most weeks type performer he will go to the highest bidder next spring and the Bills would probably be looking at about a 5th round comp in value (obviously depending what else they do). The Bills will then either extend or use the RFA tag on Alec Anderson and let him and Tylan Grable have a competition for that spot at a guess. It is why Chase Lundt is a very interesting selection. While the Bills have a settled OL group this year there is potential for some movement next year and I think they see Lundt as a guy who could shift inside and compete or at least offer depth at guard. 

 

McGovern I think will stay and I think his number will come in around $10m AAV. 

I think he will too, I’m just saying that contracts/cap management have consequences.

 

David Edwards may be the best OG the Bills have had since Richie Incognito.

 

Now OG isn’t a position I would love to overpay either but that’s part of the trade off. Gun to my head, I’d rather pay for Edwards than Cook.

[Einstein's Dog]

15 minutes ago, Ga boy said:

Likewise, to those who say we don’t need him, I ask does he increase our chances of winning our first SB?  I see a million heads nodding, so why quibble over a few million.  It’s not our money anyway. 😂

The reason you quibble is because there is a salary cap.  If you overpay for an RB there will be less funds for other positions.  I would have rather the cap allocation went to DK Metcalf instead of an RB.

 

Secondly, from a longer term perspective it's a bad look for the FO to be perceived to have given in to the demands of a squeaky wheel (see Dallas Cowboys).  The way the FO negotiates has brought excellent deals with most of the good drafted players, making an exception will make future negotiations more difficult.

 

Third, many people here are not placing the value of Cook for what he has done, but rather for what he could be.  Cook's stats are at best, at the level of D Henry, $8M a year.  Upstream people are saying he should be in the tier of Jacobs, Kamara, or A Jones - yet Cook has never put up those kind of numbers.

[DrDawkinstein]

2 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

The reason you quibble is because there is a salary cap.  If you overpay for an RB there will be less funds for other positions.  I would have rather the cap allocation went to DK Metcalf instead of an RB.

 

Secondly, from a longer term perspective it's a bad look for the FO to be perceived to have given in to the demands of a squeaky wheel (see Dallas Cowboys).  The way the FO negotiates has brought excellent deals with most of the good drafted players, making an exception will make future negotiations more difficult.

 

Third, many people here are not placing the value of Cook for what he has done, but rather for what he could be.  Cook's stats are at best, at the level of D Henry, $8M a year.  Upstream people are saying he should be in the tier of Jacobs, Kamara, or A Jones - yet Cook has never put up those kind of numbers.

 

Henry's contract is an anomaly that yall need to get over. It isnt a market value contract. He is in his 30s. Additionally, his cap hit this year is $13M, so already much closer to what we're talking about for Cook. And the Ravens are now the top spenders at the RB position in the entire league.

 

Just like no one is asking Cook to be paid like Barkley who is above $20M/yr.

 

But Cook is arguably better than Jonathan Taylor who is making more than $15M this year.

[RoscoeParrish]

8 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

But Cook is arguably better than Jonathan Taylor who is making more than $15M this year

feel like this is why paying RBs is a bad idea. 

Three years ago, JT was maybe the best back in football.

 

Now, maybe Cook is in that top 5.

 

things just change so fast at the position.

 

The top 5 leading rushers in 2021 were Taylor, Chubb, Mixon, Cook and Najee. 
 

2 are out of the league or almost out, Mixon (old) and Taylor (hurt often) are overpaid, and Najee was let go by the team that drafted him in the first.

 

By 2027, imo the chance Cook is still a premier back is extremely low. 

Edited 7 hours ago by RoscoeParrish

[muppy]

13 hours ago, White Linen said:

 

I get what you're saying and I don't think any fan enjoys a player they relatively like, posturing against the team they love.  I don't even know if this stuff is proven to work. 

 

However, RB's especially, the way they get used and discarded.  I'm for them doing whatever they have to, in order to earn every last dollar.

 

 

 

this is a great post because it makes clear my original thoughts much better than I did originally. BINGO matey. And he deserving to be paid for the wear and tear a position like that takes on his body he deserves as much bank as he can get. Agreed.

 

Get it done Beane!

 

the money and the salary cap and such are numbers constantly manipulated. I suck at math so I don't comment on it.  And I honestly don't care  HOW it is done. I just want the best roster possible and please don't let prime assets walk.

period.

 

m

Edited 7 hours ago by muppy

[DrDawkinstein]

10 minutes ago, RoscoeParrish said:

feel like this is why paying RBs is a bad idea. 

Three years ago, JT was maybe the best back in football.

 

Now, maybe Cook is in that top 5.

 

things just change so fast at the position.

 

The top 5 leading rushers in 2021 were Taylor, Chubb, Mixon, Cook and Najee. 
 

2 are out of the league or almost out, Mixon (old) and Taylor (hurt often) are overpaid, and Najee was let go by the team that drafted him in the first.

 

By 2027, imo the chance Cook is still a premier back is extremely low. 

 

I think theres a bit of correlation=/= causation here.

 

All your points dont add up to an indictment of the RB position as much as they are knocks on individual situations or team problems.

 

Mixon is old, Cook is not. Taylor is often injured because Indy has nothing else on offense, and no QB (let alone the league MVP). Pittsburgh is a team in flux who looks to be actively setting up their first tank ever.

 

All of them had far more on their shoulders and took a much larger brunt of carrying the offense and being ran into the ground.

 

The argument posters make about Cook only getting 50% of the snaps is a feature of our Offense and Team, not a bug/issue. It will only serve to keep him fresh and running longer.

 

And even at 50% of snaps, he is the largest piece of our Offense outside of Josh. Cook had 207 rushing attempts 32 receptions last year. He got the ball 239 times. The next most utilized player is Shakir with 76 receptions. Not even 1/3rd of Cooks touches.

 

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by DrDawkinstein

[Bullfrog]

If I was cook I would skip one or two days of OTA.  Then I would show up and put in the work. His voice has been heard. 

 

I think bean could get behind that and would make it more likely an extension gets done.

 

You don't hurt yourself. You don't hurt the team and you made your voice heard.

[Einstein's Dog]

6 minutes ago, muppy said:

this is a great post because it makes clear my original thoughts much better than I did originally. BINGO matey. And he deserving to be paid for the wear and tear a position like that takes on his body he deserves as much bank as he can get. Agreed.

 

Get it done Beane!

 

the money and the salary cap and such are numbers constantly manipulated. I suck at math so I don't comment on it.  And I honestly don't care . I just want the best roster possible and please don't let prime assets walk.

period.

 

m

Sometimes it's the way people go about things.  I don't begrudge Cook for trying to get paid, but I don't need to hear about it.  What good did going on social media do him?  For the most part, it just made Cook look overly greedy - a ridiculous amount of an ask ($15M).  How did they expect the Bills fanbase to react?

 

No, I don't want Beane to give in to what look like the petulant demands of a greedy team (Cook/brother/agent).  The other 4-5 draft players were able to quietly get decent deals done.  And $8-$10M isn't chump change - if they weren't idiots that amount could set them up for life.

 

It seems like a good sign that the Bills FO didn't draft an RB, meaning they expect Cook to play.  Seems we'll need to take it year by year with Cook.

[GunnerBill]

40 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

The reason you quibble is because there is a salary cap.  If you overpay for an RB there will be less funds for other positions.  I would have rather the cap allocation went to DK Metcalf instead of an RB.

 

Secondly, from a longer term perspective it's a bad look for the FO to be perceived to have given in to the demands of a squeaky wheel (see Dallas Cowboys).  The way the FO negotiates has brought excellent deals with most of the good drafted players, making an exception will make future negotiations more difficult.

 

Third, many people here are not placing the value of Cook for what he has done, but rather for what he could be.  Cook's stats are at best, at the level of D Henry, $8M a year.  Upstream people are saying he should be in the tier of Jacobs, Kamara, or A Jones - yet Cook has never put up those kind of numbers.

 

You are looking at numbers as total yards though. I'm looking at it as yards per attempt. Cook isn't a mash into the pile 20 times a game back. He is a big play threat. Josh Jacobs has never been that and Kamara and Jones are not that at this stage of their careers. 

 

As for your first point.... I think is where I am divorcing theory, from reality. I'd rather that money had gone on DK too. I'd rather have my explosive playmakers outside as receivers and in an ideal team building plan I'd be against paying a running back even if it is as one as explosive as Cook. 

 

But where I have got to is a result of the team we have. Not the team I'd build if it were me. Beane has shown no urgency to add explosive playmakers outside and so it leaves this offense, except for Cook, really lacking in guys who are a proven threat to go the distance every time they touch the ball. That's why I lean towards pay him at this point and I am not super worried about AAV. I am worried about length of commitment. A 3 year extension where the Bills can get out without major pain after the 2nd new year likely keeps Cook here until after his age 28 season - which tends to be when you start to see the thread wear down on the tires.... even for a guy that came into the NFL with a lot left in the tank given his usage in college. If he wants longer than that AND the $15m number I am out. But if he'd take that number for 3 years (which when you add it to the one year he has remaining leaves you in actual fact looking at about $12.7m AAV over 4) then I am leaning towards I'd do it. Because if he doesn't play man.... it isn't just the explosives you lose its the avoiding third down where Cook rips off 11 on 1st and 10 and immediately gets you a new set of downs. That is gonna make playing offense a ton harder if that's Davis for 3 or 4 half of those times.

[DrDawkinstein]

19 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

Sometimes it's the way people go about things.  I don't begrudge Cook for trying to get paid, but I don't need to hear about it.  What good did going on social media do him?  For the most part, it just made Cook look overly greedy - a ridiculous amount of an ask ($15M).  How did they expect the Bills fanbase to react?

 

No, I don't want Beane to give in to what look like the petulant demands of a greedy team (Cook/brother/agent).  The other 4-5 draft players were able to quietly get decent deals done.  And $8-$10M isn't chump change - if they weren't idiots that amount could set them up for life.

 

It seems like a good sign that the Bills FO didn't draft an RB, meaning they expect Cook to play.  Seems we'll need to take it year by year with Cook.

 

Yall talk like Cook went on some rant and aggressively attacked the team and called out Beane, or publicly asked for a trade, or called out he was denied a meeting with the owner...

 

He posted a COMMENT deep, deep on someone else's post that was already talking about players getting paid of simply "15 mil year". That's it! Not even 3 full words!

 

After that, he posted 3 emoji reactions to the news of Barkley's new contract. That's it.

 

He also posted "Love you Buffalo" (sincerely)

 

Most recently he posted a pic of him and Josh together.

 

Petulant child?

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by DrDawkinstein

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Even more to your point, literally $25M per year now that streaming is involved.

 

 

And there is an even bigger bump coming. 

2 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Yall talk like Cook want on some rant and aggressively attacked the team and called out Beane, or publicly asked for a trade, or called out he was denied a meeting with the owner...

 

He posted a COMMENT deep, deep on someone else's post that was already talking about players getting paid of simply "15 mil year". That's it! Not even 3 full words!

 

After that, he posted 3 emoji reactions to the news of Barkley's new contract. That's it.

 

He also posted "Love you Buffalo"

 

Most recently he posted a pic of him and Josh together.

 

Petulant child?

 

Agree. Don't think Cook has acted like that at all. It's been quite low key by modern NFL contract negotiation standards.

[Don Otreply]

I just watched Cooks 2024 highlights, along with our other RBs highlights, what’s not to like? With our O line, as the fulcrum we can continue to leverage a very nice collection of talent in that room, it would be a shame to bugger up that portion of our offense, some kind of accord needs to be reached, hoping for some flexibility on both sides, I think it is going to happen to both sides benefit, jmo. 

[Einstein's Dog]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Agree. Don't think Cook has acted like that at all. It's been quite low key by modern NFL contract negotiation standards.

What other Bills player put out anything similar?  And lets not forget his brother's nonsense, or putting the house up for sale.  Cook's been quiet now, maybe because they let him look into trade/pay partners and found it to be limited.

 

Cook has been an exciting 2 down back, in the top tier of those.  Close to D Henry ($8M) level.

 

Shakir is also an exciting WR.  But he is a slot WR so he got paid at the slot level, not at the DK Metcalf level.  Cook is a 2 down back that appears to want to be paid like a 3 down workhorse back.  I don't think the Bills plan on using him like that, or paying him like that.

 

For me, there's no love lost on the business side of this now.  Play Cook at his bargain $5M (and if he doesn't show - fine him).  Then next year you have the decision of whether or not to franchise tag him.  They wanted hardball, they got it.  Beane can do this while saying the whole time "How he loves J Cook and J Cook means everything to this team".

[GunnerBill]

22 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

What other Bills player put out anything similar?  And lets not forget his brother's nonsense, or putting the house up for sale.  Cook's been quiet now, maybe because they let him look into trade/pay partners and found it to be limited.

 

Cook has been an exciting 2 down back, in the top tier of those.  Close to D Henry ($8M) level.

 

Shakir is also an exciting WR.  But he is a slot WR so he got paid at the slot level, not at the DK Metcalf level.  Cook is a 2 down back that appears to want to be paid like a 3 down workhorse back.  I don't think the Bills plan on using him like that, or paying him like that.

 

For me, there's no love lost on the business side of this now.  Play Cook at his bargain $5M (and if he doesn't show - fine him).  Then next year you have the decision of whether or not to franchise tag him.  They wanted hardball, they got it.  Beane can do this while saying the whole time "How he loves J Cook and J Cook means everything to this team".

 

Put out what? One message on social media? Plenty. 

[Einstein's Dog]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Put out what? One message on social media? Plenty. 

Who?  What other Bills player put out a ridiculous amount they wanted to get paid? 

 

I didn't hear about it but I don't have active accounts of all players.  Seems like all the other Bills players quietly got deals done.

[GunnerBill]

Just now, Einstein's Dog said:

Who?  What other Bills player put out a ridiculous amount they wanted to get paid? 

 

I didn't hear about it but I don't have active accounts of all players.  Seems like all the other Bills players quietly got deals done.

 

You say it is ridiculous amount. I don't. I say it's the top end of his market, sure. But ridiculous? Not for me. I don't think any of the other guys that renewed this offseason did. But Diggs and Poyer got new deals after playing the social media game in previous seasons. 

[Don Otreply]

16 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Put out what? One message on social media? Plenty. 

Really? Diggs and Poyer are plenty? More accurately a minority of Bills players, who went that route, 

Edited 5 hours ago by Don Otreply

[RoscoeParrish]

1 hour ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

I think theres a bit of correlation=/= causation here.

 

All your points dont add up to an indictment of the RB position as much as they are knocks on individual situations or team problems.

 

Mixon is old, Cook is not. Taylor is often injured because Indy has nothing else on offense, and no QB (let alone the league MVP). Pittsburgh is a team in flux who looks to be actively setting up their first tank ever.

 

All of them had far more on their shoulders and took a much larger brunt of carrying the offense and being ran into the ground.

 

The argument posters make about Cook only getting 50% of the snaps is a feature of our Offense and Team, not a bug/issue. It will only serve to keep him fresh and running longer.

 

And even at 50% of snaps, he is the largest piece of our Offense outside of Josh. Cook had 207 rushing attempts 32 receptions last year. He got the ball 239 times. The next most utilized player is Shakir with 76 receptions. Not even 1/3rd of Cooks touches.

 

 

 

Taylor is often injured because there’s no one on his team, but I’m having an issue with correlation/causation?

 

The point is the position is SUPER volatile. It has been for a while. Guys like Arian Foster could lead the league in rushing one year and disappear two years later.

 

It has happened to legitimate All-Pro talent. Dalvin, Zeke, Gurley.

 

You can say “well those were all individual circumstances” when all those dudes fell off a cliff, but what that demonstrates to me is that running backs fall particularly victim to circumstances that end their careers in the blink of an eye.

 

There’s a reason it’s the lowest skill position player league-wide. It’s because they are short-term investments that don’t last and are very dependent on situation as a general rule.

 

He’s asking for Shakir money when Shakir has a FAR and I mean VERY FAR better chance of actually finishing his deal in Buffalo.

Edited 5 hours ago by RoscoeParrish

[H2o]

Cook is a good RB. He is way better than D'Andre Swift. Trying to compare the two just doesn't make sense, to me at least. Their body types are different. Their style of play is different. Swift is like a little bowling ball at 5'9" and 215lbs. James Cook is 5'11" and, at best, 195lbs. Cook is lightening quick and has a burst that Swift does not. I would compare Swift more to someone like David Montgomery, and Swift is not even on his level. Yes they are different players, but Cook is a legitimate homerun threat at the RB position where Swift is not. 

 

I know I have my opinions about how he and his camp have handled situation entirely from the jump, and I still think his brother is a complete idiot, but our current team would be weaker without him. It would put more strain on Josh to carry the load if Cook were not here, more so than he already does, and that is not what we want or need at this stage in Josh's career. The hits do start to add up and take their toll. Cook is someone that other teams do have to gameplan for because he is that homerun threat. With the position not being addressed in the draft, and a trade not being made at the same time, I think that pretty much settles he will be here this year. And he better be ready to ball out if he wants to get that big contract he's looking for.