MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 1st, what would you rather have, 5 million in the bank to spend on no one or have 2-3 million and have a player that was our best WR last year. not a huge difference between saving 5 million and saving 2-3 million, when you are talking in the 20 millions.Regardless keep Moulds, he is a leader, yes he complains, some leaders do that. He is still the face of the bills to me. Marv loves him, and there are no replacements out there, that we can ensure will sign with us The Moulds situation is one of paying an older WR on the decline a TON of money, when you could sign a younger, cheaper, and (at this stage of Moulds' career) just as good WR. If Moulds takes say, at least a $2.5M paycut, then I'd keep him, since the difference ($4.5M-$2.5M=$2M) is pretty much what a new WR would cost anyway. Again I'm going on the assumption that none of the guys I mentioned takes a paycut. Restructuring Schobel? Did you think his Pro bowl type season wasn't good enough, compared to what we are paying other players on this team he is a steal. I'd sign his brother as a bonus to him. While I would have to agree about Fletcher, I think we can extend his contract. By restructuring Schobel, I meant giving him more money in bonus to reduce his base salary and cap hit. He's young and will be with the Bills for awhile, so it's a good move. And as for Fletcher, I should have clarified that I meant extend, because he's only got 1 year left on his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poeticlaw Posted February 23, 2006 Author Share Posted February 23, 2006 The Moulds situation is one of paying an older WR on the decline a TON of money, when you could sign a younger, cheaper, and (at this stage of Moulds' career) just as good WR. If Moulds takes say, at least a $2.5M paycut, then I'd keep him, since the difference ($4.5M-$2.5M=$2M) is pretty much what a new WR would cost anyway. Again I'm going on the assumption that none of the guys I mentioned takes a paycut. By restructuring Schobel, I meant giving him more money in bonus to reduce his base salary and cap hit. He's young and will be with the Bills for awhile, so it's a good move. And as for Fletcher, I should have clarified that I meant extend, because he's only got 1 year left on his contract. 609268[/snapback] The thing I am saying about Moulds needing to be released is being overlooked. Moulds counts over $10 mil this year and restructuring will only cost most next year. From a realistic point of view next year wont be a cap fre year the NFL will get the extension done. Which means we cant sign valuable free agents this year or in the next. I respect the fact that every one likes him and hes the best receiver on THIS Bills team. However, he is not worth the contract he has. The QB isnt situated, nothing is set in stone. But we need to get younger and better. I would consider Antonia Bryant a viable replacement just to name one. This isnt about one player itas about overall improvement to the entire team. Realistically we are an offensive line away. How much do you think they make. We pay all of our under 1.5 mil except MW. Bently alone is goint to cost a Min contract of 5 mil a year, so my question to the nay sayers is this: If you have a chance to save 10 mil this year and 10 mil next year (which s 20 mill over 2years for the math impaired) to repair the ENTIRE LINE (5 players rember Peters isnt paid to be a OL yet and someone can still come in and scoop him up if hes not signed to the right contract before then, look at Crowell as an example) paying an average of 4 mil or less per player that will open holes for your running backs and release preesure of the passing game and give whom ever the QB is time to throw the ball would you still want to keep Moulds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 The thing I am saying about Moulds needing to be released is being overlooked. Moulds counts over $10 mil this year and restructuring will only cost most next year. From a realistic point of view next year wont be a cap fre year the NFL will get the extension done. Which means we cant sign valuable free agents this year or in the next. Again, I'm saying PAYCUT (of at least $2.5M, which still leaves him with a decent salary of $3.589M for the year), not restructure. And again I'm not expecting him to take it, so sayonara. But if he does, keep him, since the Bills will be spending around $2M ($4.5M cap savings-$2.5M paycut=$2M) to get a replacement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Again, I'm saying PAYCUT (of at least $2.5M, which still leaves him with a decent salary of $3.589M for the year), not restructure. And again I'm not expecting him to take it, so sayonara. But if he does, keep him, since the Bills will be spending around $2M ($4.5M cap savings-$2.5M paycut=$2M) to get a replacement. 609289[/snapback] Do you truly believe that any team out there would pay an aging, slowing, disruptive Moulds 3.58 mil next year? I am thinking that he would be lucky to fetch 2 mil per season from another team. Jmo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Do you truly believe that any team out there would pay an aging, slowing, disruptive Moulds 3.58 mil next year? I am thinking that he would be lucky to fetch 2 mil per season from another team. Jmo. Well if I'm not mistaken, now that I think about it, Eric can only take a 30% reduction in base salary. If that's the case, he can only reduce his base salary by $1.83M. And if that's the case, he's got to go. And I looked into the numbers, and since his new deal in 2001, he's made $28.66M the past 5 years, for an average of $28.66M (assuming a total contract value of $42M). Has Eric been worth an average of over $5M a year the past 5 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Well if I'm not mistaken, now that I think about it, Eric can only take a 30% reduction in base salary. If that's the case, he can only reduce his base salary by $1.83M. And if that's the case, he's got to go. And I looked into the numbers, and since his new deal in 2001, he's made $28.66M the past 5 years, for an average of $28.66M (assuming a total contract value of $42M). Has Eric been worth an average of over $5M a year the past 5 years? 609296[/snapback] You are asking the wrong guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 You are asking the wrong guy. That part wasn't for you per se, because I know the answer. With those kinds of numbers, Eric should allow the Bills to cut him and re-sign him for just $2M, which still puts him at over $5M for the past 6 years. But who are we kidding here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 That part wasn't for you per se, because I know the answer. With those kinds of numbers, Eric should allow the Bills to cut him and re-sign him for just $2M, which still puts him at over $5M for the past 6 years. But who are we kidding here? 609300[/snapback] You know MBD, I am not sure that your scenario is even allowed by the CBA. It might very well be mind you, but I am not so sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 You know MBD, I am not sure that your scenario is even allowed by the CBA. It might very well be mind you, but I am not so sure. You may be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 You may be right. 609306[/snapback] Again, I don't know for sure. Btw, that "who are we kidding here" was a great line. My compliments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Again, I don't know for sure. After you mentioned it, I thought I remembered that a team can't re-sign a player they just cut, or for a certain period of time, or something like that. I guess the only avenue left is for them to add a year to his contract without giving him more money. Btw, that "who are we kidding here" was a great line. My compliments. Sank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernMan Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 noo....lets cut these guys. Daimon Shelton, $1,131,160 hit, $768,840 savings ($6,160 dead cap) Coy Wire - $706,160 hit, $600,000 savings ($56,160 dead) Ryan Neufeld, $672,826 hit, $510,000 savings ($90,000 dead) Joe Burns, $566,160, $538,840 savings ($6,160 dead) (If I'm understanding these numbers correctly) Extra cap room = $3,076,306 Total Savings = $2,417,680 Dead = $158,480 And we lose a bunch of crappy players that were not doing anything anyways. Mike Williams does need to be cut, but cutting Moulds is among the dumbest things this team could do. A pox upon you for wanting to cut him. We've been through the logic 1000 times. After cutting Moulds you have $4 Mil to replace Moulds and still benefit. Which then raises the question, can you find talent equal to Moulds for $4 mil. The answer is, of course, no. This does not even factor his team leadership, history with the Bills, and fan love for him. 607921[/snapback] When calculating the savings, you have to complete the equation by adding the dollar figure for the replacement. In other words, cutting Joe Burns doesn't save the Bills $566k. Say his replacement gets 350k - in actuality the savings is closer to 200k. NOW....the team has to make a judgement decision whether or not the 200k savings (chump change in today's NFL budget) is worth the break in continuity. Maybe Burns has good value as a special team player that would be missed. Who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poeticlaw Posted February 23, 2006 Author Share Posted February 23, 2006 Again, I'm saying PAYCUT (of at least $2.5M, which still leaves him with a decent salary of $3.589M for the year), not restructure. And again I'm not expecting him to take it, so sayonara. But if he does, keep him, since the Bills will be spending around $2M ($4.5M cap savings-$2.5M paycut=$2M) to get a replacement. 609289[/snapback] I think you might be missing something here: Moulds cap figure for the upcoming season is $10,855,666-a 2.5 mil cap figure=8,355,666 but an 11 mil cap figure next year. so it willl cost us $13 mill to keep him this year and release him next year with only a savings of 2.5 mil. Where as if we cut him now we save 5 mil this year and 5 mill next year which is 7.5 mil then And his replace ment will be atleast 1 mil this year for a toal savings of 4 mill if released this year which is still enough to bring in 2 more quality free agents this year with room next year. Keep in mind the creative signing can have a low first year figure but balloons next year. We cant have ballooning salaries next year if we dont cut him this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poeticlaw Posted March 2, 2006 Author Share Posted March 2, 2006 I'd rather see Preston at C than G. It's unlikely the Bills will be able to get Bentley. How will Evans respond to being the #1 guy? If he acts like Peerless, you can always acquire a Moulds-type guy later on. If his response is more like Steve Smith's, well, problem solved. 608294[/snapback] I got to say I was not anticipating a Lawyer Malloy cut, he like moulds is the best at his position on our Bills Team. I also thought his 3.5mil was in line with SS in the leaugue. Hopefully we will be targeting someone who makes it look like we did the right thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts