dave mcbride Posted March 14, 2006 Author Share Posted March 14, 2006 You're entitled to the opinion that previous bonuses mean zero. But that is a totally deluded POV under any circumstances. So you're under the impression that David Givens is worth 9 million this year, but only 3.5 million next year because that is what he is going to be paid in cash? So I suppose he will be grossly overpaid this year and grossly underpaid next year? When the common, normal, legitimate way to look at it is how much they actually get paid in the year with their bonus and their salary. Mike Williams was underpaid two years ago when he only made 700K right? I thought he was a bust? And man, that Peyton Manning is getting totally hosed this year. His salary is 1 million dollars! For the best player in the league! And he only gets like 1.6 million next year. Todd Collins makes more than Manning! 629376[/snapback] you're entitled to believe that when a player looks at potentialities, he equates a $4 million salary for the upcoming season with $8 million in cash from another team because an accounting trick makes it look like he is also receiving an extra $4 million (prorated from $16 million) stemming from a bonus that he received 3+ seasons ago. sorry - that's not how someone like moulds (or any other player of his skill level and disposition) looks at it. he already earned that money so it's effectively water under the bridge for him. he wants more, and the bills trying to force him to change his contract offers him the option of seeking that greater pile of money. they have to pull the trigger, though, for it to happen. despite his refusal to renegotiate, they won't do it -- yet. which explains why he's pissed. mind you, i'm not sticking up for him (or the bills for that matter). i'm just trying to be level-headed about how he's looking at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sen. John Blutarsky Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 If one more post begins "you're entitled" I think I'm going to be entitled to barf... Girls....you're both pretty.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Moulds is on the books for 11 million this year alone and 8.7 million next year. If you just forget his signing bonus from years past, which only you and JDG seem to want to do, Kelly, its called rational logic. Bringing up money that has already been spent is like pretending you can change the past. Unless you've invented a time machine, then the only things the Bills can worry about is what they control - which is from this point onwards. even though it was actual money AND it counts against you on the cap, over the next two years, Givins will take in about 11+ mil cash and Moulds will take in 14+ mil cash. 629229[/snapback] Who's talking about two years? The cost for Moulds this year to the Bills is $7 million dollars in new money for a $10 million total cap hit. The cost for David Givens this year is $8 million plus $1-3 million in salary, for a total cap hit of $5.3 million from Moulds + $2.5-$4.5 million cap hit from Givens. Cap savings to the Bills if we had cut Moulds and signed Givens - $0.5 - $2.5 million. *That's* why we haven't cut Moulds yet boys and girls. JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 you're entitled to believe that when a player looks at potentialities, he equates a $4 million salary for the upcoming season with $8 million in cash from another team because an accounting trick makes it look like he is also receiving an extra $4 million (prorated from $16 million) stemming from a bonus that he received 3+ seasons ago. sorry - that's not how someone like moulds (or any other player of his skill level and disposition) looks at it. he already earned that money so it's effectively water under the bridge for him. he wants more, and the bills trying to force him to change his contract offers him the option of seeking that greater pile of money. they have to pull the trigger, though, for it to happen. despite his refusal to renegotiate, they won't do it -- yet. which explains why he's pissed. mind you, i'm not sticking up for him (or the bills for that matter). i'm just trying to be level-headed about how he's looking at it. 629394[/snapback] Of course a player is going to look at it that way. But a player, Moulds, for instance, is also not going to look at the 5 million the Bills would have paid him already for this season and next that he already pocketed and he isn't playing for. That is what is called selfish, myopic and unreasonable. I surely understand where Moulds is coming from, and I have a lot of sympathy for him, especially him because he's been stuck with the Bills for his entire career. One of my favorite players. But I have ZERO empathy for him as far as money goes because he was signed to the biggest contract a WR ever had at the time I believe, and he simply didn't live up to it. Ever. He's made about 40 million in the last five years and had a decent year in 2001 where Peerless outplayed him, a very good year in 2002, a crappy injury plagued year in 2003 (which isn't his fault, just a fact), a very mediocre 2004 and a very mediocre 2005 in which he quit on his team In fact, in five years he has been vastly overpaid IMO in four of those five. So where is this sympathy for Moulds coming from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Yeah really, people are pulling stuff outta their ass's saying he's a team cancer and a locker room a-hole...WHERE has ANY of his teammates said that? All these people getting all butt hurt cause he wants to play for a winner. You are the ones that sound like cry babies, not EMO. 628730[/snapback] How naive can you be? Do you really expect to see team mates questioning the longest tenured player on team IN THE MEDIA? Oh wait, that's what Moulds did when he called out his QB IN PUBLIC (right or wrong about JPL, a leader NEVER does that. It pisses people off). Publicly complained AGAIN that he wasn't getting the ball enough; called out his coaches and their game plans IN PUBLIC (again, not something a vet leader should do). Publicly campaigned for HIS QB to start (starting to see a pattern there? Kinda undermines things a bit). QUIT on his team IN PUBLIC during a game against a hated rival and had a fight with his position coach to boot BEFORE he tuned out the coaches with his headphones at halftime (yep, that's a real professional for ya, hmm?). Suffice to say, he pissed off a lot of players in that locker room last season. Once he's gone, it will start to come out. I stick by my assertions that he's a locker room a-hole cancer. The evidence is overwhelming. Has nothing to do with him wanting to play for a winner. More power to him for that. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Kelly, its called rational logic. Bringing up money that has already been spent is like pretending you can change the past. Unless you've invented a time machine, then the only things the Bills can worry about is what they control - which is from this point onwards.Who's talking about two years? The cost for Moulds this year to the Bills is $7 million dollars in new money for a $10 million total cap hit. The cost for David Givens this year is $8 million plus $1-3 million in salary, for a total cap hit of $5.3 million from Moulds + $2.5-$4.5 million cap hit from Givens. Cap savings to the Bills if we had cut Moulds and signed Givens - $0.5 - $2.5 million. *That's* why we haven't cut Moulds yet boys and girls. JDG 629420[/snapback] I would easily cut Moulds and sign Givens for the same money. I am not arguing against that. I am saying it's foolish to totally ignore money that the Bills have already paid Moulds for this year like it doesn't count. Under that argument, Peyton Manning was paid 35 million and was WAY WAY overpaid last year but is getting totally ripped off this year because he is making only 1 million this year. And he's scheduled to make like 1.6 million next year. In fact, he should hold out. That 35 million doesnt matter any more. It does count. All I said was if we keep Moulds at his contract which he is asking for, he would count for more cash and real money and cap money than Givens got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantankerous Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 At least Moulds had the nuts to speak up when everything was a mess though. Calling out the coaches was necessary...they were so predictable I was calling what they'd do 80% of the time from my couch! K-9, I can see your point though. My mind is being distracted by this pain in my tooth! Arrrrr! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 At least Moulds had the nuts to speak up when everything was a mess though. Calling out the coaches was necessary...they were so predictable I was calling what they'd do 80% of the time from my couch! K-9, I can see your point though. My mind is being distracted by this pain in my tooth! Arrrrr! 629504[/snapback] Except for the fact that he called out the coaches during the one half in the entire season where they knew what they were doing, and we had built a 21-0 lead on the road against our arch rival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted March 14, 2006 Author Share Posted March 14, 2006 So where is this sympathy for Moulds coming from? 629444[/snapback] He's a familiar face of long standing, which tends to make people sympathetic to him (as opposed to rent-a-players like milloy and adams). not that moulds doesn't aspire to rent-a-playerdom himself, mind you ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 He's a familiar face of long standing, which tends to make people sympathetic to him (as opposed to rent-a-players like milloy and adams). not that moulds doesn't aspire to rent-a-playerdom himself, mind you ... 629513[/snapback] That is kind of my point. If Moulds really did just want to go to a contender, to try to win a ring at this late point in the game, and it wasn't about the money, the Bills would have released him long ago. But it's about the money. I have a lot of sympathy for him, as I said. But I have no sympathy about his contracts, what he has been paid and what he wants to be paid. Nor do I have any respect whatsoever for Gregg Johnson who is the dude who just made up the injury story in the press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 So where is this sympathy for Moulds coming from? Its not about "sympathy" - its about cutting our best offensive player for marginal cap savings at best. JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Its not about "sympathy" - its about cutting our best offensive player for marginal cap savings at best. JDG 629577[/snapback] Tell me, seriously, in CASH, what would you pay Moulds to play for the Bills this season. How much do you think Eric Moulds is worth this year in cash? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts