The Dean Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I hope they don't squash him. 623985[/snapback] Sitting on something doesn't necessarily squash it. You should know THAT by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambler Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 The Bills can take their time with Moulds. If they need the cap space, they can then cut him loose. 623812[/snapback] Why take the time? Cut him now. It's not like the Bills are one player from a Super Bowl. Even so, he was there last year and he didn't produce much. The Bills need to rebuild (regrettably) and that means Moulds is not a part of the future. Let's face facts - the $10.8 cap hit for Moulds is ridiculous. Half of that can be saved when he's cut. Cut him now and use that space to fill other huge needs - like both lines!!!!! Here's a very good objective analysis on the Moulds situation. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2006/03/0...our-downs/3727/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Why take the time? Cut him now. It's not like the Bills are one player from a Super Bowl. Even so, he was there last year and he didn't produce much. The Bills need to rebuild (regrettably) and that means Moulds is not a part of the future. Let's face facts - the $10.8 cap hit for Moulds is ridiculous. Half of that can be saved when he's cut. Cut him now and use that space to fill other huge needs - like both lines!!!!! Here's a very good objective analysis on the Moulds situation. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2006/03/0...our-downs/3727/ 624017[/snapback] Again, there's no hurry. They can sign FAs NOW. If they need the $ to sign someone, they can cut Moulds then. They may get EM to take a pay may get something in trade. Why should they cut him NOW? To make you happy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 As a sort of respect to a guy who has served them for 10 years and whodeserves to get a shot early on in the FA, if he is not going to be in their plans. It would be the kind of thing they could do, but they don't have to. What purpose will it achieve if they are going to cut him June knowing inMarch that he was not in their plans...They did it to Drew Bledsoe, and also wish they had done it to Travis Henry....I definitely wish they do it to Moulds... 623948[/snapback] In the case of Drew and Travis they were not in the plans. Their successors had already been chosen, it was a matter of how they would be shuttled off. That's not the case with Moulds. Marv said he wants to keep Moulds, so if they can afford to (especially now with the extra cap space), and a better alternative does not come up (and, as the article mentions, the pickings are slim), then it might be 'cheaper to keep him.' And as long as they can afford to keep him he can always be trade bait. I doubt they'll be out there shopping him, but if someone comes calling, especially approaching the draft, he might be useful that way. I'd like to see Eric stay with the team. I don't think he's worth the cap cost, but he still draws the double-teams (whether he deserves them or not), and we need a solid 1/2 pair (even if Eric becomes the 2). That said, this is a business, and as much as I would hate to see him go, I'd hate more to hear that sentimentality played into when and how he departed from the team. If he's going and you can get value out of him, get it. If he's staying as a "last resort," so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv's Neighbor Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 we are DOOOMED if we cut moulds 623783[/snapback] Well WTF, we're doomed if we keep him, pay him a lot of money and start Losman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 11, 2006 Author Share Posted March 11, 2006 A decision has to be made in 15 minutes. He's as good as gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 11, 2006 Author Share Posted March 11, 2006 Verdict isn't out yet. Most likely he's outta here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicken Wing '73 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 I'm sorry to say it, but he'll be gone. Bring in Givens or Randel El!!! Keep Moulds! When the best FA wide receiver is Randel El and the best college WR isn't expected to go til the mid to late part of the first round this is not a year to shop receivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambler Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 They may get EM to take a pay may get something in trade. Why should they cut him NOW? To make you happy? 624033[/snapback] What's a pay may? Its the smart thing to do. Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCBongo Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 With the increase in the cap, Bills can resign Moulds, put some of the money in an upfront roster bonus, thus reducing his impact on the cap long term. He is a solid receiver who brings respect from opposing secondaires and acts as a mentor to younger receivers. I think there is a lot of sentimentality on wanting to keep Moulds, but he can still be a solid contributor for the next few seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 With the increase in the cap, Bills can resign Moulds, put some of the money in an upfront roster bonus, thus reducing his impact on the cap long term. He is a solid receiver who brings respect from opposing secondaires and acts as a mentor to younger receivers. I think there is a lot of sentimentality on wanting to keep Moulds, but he can still be a solid contributor for the next few seasons. 624344[/snapback] A roster bonus would not reduce the long-term cap impact. In the long term, the money you pay a player is equal to cap hit. A roster bonus merely pushes the cap hit into some future year is all. With the increased cap, there's less urgency to cut Moulds. You could do so if A) his replacement was already on the roster, or B) the Bills needed the Moulds cap space to sign younger, better players at other positions (such as Bentley), or C) if you had a younger player such as Parrish that you wanted to give a starting position to. But barring one of these three things, it might make sense to keep Moulds for now. Not that I'm the least bit happy about paying him $7 million in new money for just one year of football. There's no way Moulds is worth that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 As they say, "a bird in the hand..." Given the extra room teams have to sign players, you don't cut a player unless you have his replacement already signed. Moulds won't be going anywhere unless they get someone else in first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Verdict isn't out yet. Most likely he's outta here. 624184[/snapback] Very, very Sopranoesque of you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 A roster bonus would not reduce the long-term cap impact. In the long term, the money you pay a player is equal to cap hit. A roster bonus merely pushes the cap hit into some future year is all. Hummmm, here i thought a roster bonus was a non-amortized bonus, unlike a signing bonus. Wasn't the deal with Winfield's contract with Minny that he took his bonus as a roster bonus rather than a signing bonus because Minny had tons of space under the cap last year? In which case, wouldn't a roster bonus reduce long-term cap impact (at the very big cost this year?) With the increased cap, there's less urgency to cut Moulds. You could do so if A) his replacement was already on the roster, or B) the Bills needed the Moulds cap space to sign younger, better players at other positions (such as Bentley), or C) if you had a younger player such as Parrish that you wanted to give a starting position to. But barring one of these three things, it might make sense to keep Moulds for now. Not that I'm the least bit happy about paying him $7 million in new money for just one year of football. There's no way Moulds is worth that. 624365[/snapback] Heaven forbid I actually kinda agree with you on something, but there's a first for everything I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 What's a pay may? Its the smart thing to do. Yes. 624206[/snapback] "pay may" "pay cut" is clearly what I was going for. But, no need to do it til you need to do it...that's the SMART thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Hummmm, here i thought a roster bonus was a non-amortized bonus, unlike a signing bonus. Wasn't the deal with Winfield's contract with Minny that he took his bonus as a roster bonus rather than a signing bonus because Minny had tons of space under the cap last year? In which case, wouldn't a roster bonus reduce long-term cap impact (at the very big cost this year?) I don't know whether you're right about roster bonuses hitting the cap 100% this year. What the original poster was suggesting was converting some of Moulds' base salary into roster bonus. So assuming you're right about how roster bonuses work, there'd be no cap consequences one way or the other. Either way, the full $7 million we're paying Moulds in salary hits the cap this year. My point was that if you paid Moulds the $7 million now, but put off the cap hit for some of that money until later, you'd still get hit with the full $7 million over the long run. Heaven forbid I actually kinda agree with you on something, but there's a first for everything I guess... It's a sign you're getting smarter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 It's a sign you're getting smarter! 624458[/snapback] Or a sign that you're having a rare lucid moment...rare for limp noodles, but it happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Again, the timing on Moulds depends on when and if there is a roster bonus due. Usually, these bonuses are due in the first week of free agency and are the triggers for a club to decide whether they will keep the player for the season or not. Moulds' cap hit is what it is (included the roster bonus, if there is one), and Bills can afford to sit on him for a while. However, if there's a roster bonus due sometime this week and he hasn't agreed to a restructure, then he will be cut just before that roster bonus is due. As always, there's usually a big difference between the cap hit and the check that RW has to write. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Or a sign that you're having a rare lucid moment...rare for limp noodles, but it happens. 624507[/snapback] It's not the strength of your arm, it's what you do with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Or a sign that you're having a rare lucid moment...rare for limp noodles, but it happens. 624507[/snapback] Even a blind squirrel finds the occasional acorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts