ganesh Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 Lions OT signs to a contract The interesting thing from this article is The contract signed on Thursday replaces the one-year deal and was negotiated against the backdrop of the deadline. According to the interpretation of the NFL Management Council, any contract completed with Backus after the close of business on Friday afternoon would have attached the franchise designation to him for the entire length of the deal. The Lions now gain back the franchise marker and, if necessary, can use it on another player in the future. This indicates that either the Bills will have to Pony up big cash to compete with the other teams next winter or will have to let Nate walk...I don't think the Bills can now sign him before the season starts or is this article incorrect ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 I dont think they have any intention of signing him back..... Yuboty is the corner of the future in his spot......Nate is strictly a rent a player this year imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 I dont think they have any intention of signing him back..... Yuboty is the corner of the future in his spot......Nate is strictly a rent a player this year imo 723188[/snapback] I think you're right on this one, and as much as Bill from NYC might hate to admit, this year's draft is going to help us out nicely when we have the cash to make a run at a Steinbach or a Jones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffal0 Bill5 Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 I'm still thinking the Bills worked out a deal with NC, based on the fact that last season was sub-par. They bought a year of his services to let the young guys get some experience, and this year will also give Nate the time to play well enough to get his $ back up. It is a win-win proposition. I have to think last season dropped his stock. Come back for one year, play well, and go with our blessing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 I think you're right on this one, and as much as Bill from NYC might hate to admit, this year's draft is going to help us out nicely when we have the cash to make a run at a Steinbach or a Jones. 723206[/snapback] LOL! Thanks for the mention! You are right. We will have more than enough cap space to make a run at Steinbach or Jones. This begs the question, will Ralph spend the money? You tell me, OK? Btw, even if we did sign one of these two very good players (who we did pass up in order to draft a slob and a rb for whom we had to knowingly wait 20 games), I would still see a serious need to allocate early resources in the draft toward both lines. I view the Bills as a team that plays to a mostly blue collar crowd, in cold weather. Imo, this type of team needs to be strong up front. The thing is, we have been allocating the bulk of our resources in recent drafts to "skill" players that are unproven, injured, and/or suck. If this is your chosen method to build a football team, how about if we simply agree to disagree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max997 Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 the issue then is why rent Nate for one year when the team is clearly not in a position to win...wouldnt it have been better to trade him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 I think you're right on this one, and as much as Bill from NYC might hate to admit, this year's draft is going to help us out nicely when we have the cash to make a run at a Steinbach or a Jones. 723206[/snapback] Exactly. The whole point of drafting a secondary this year was so we wouldnt have to be hamstrung by paying Nate big bucks, and also to get it set in place for the future. In future drafts, we concentrate on other areas. Re: the bengals, there was an article i read (espn i think, the one about them cutting one of their guards) that said they were currently working on an extension for steinbach. That coupled with jones grumbling leads me to believe that jones will walk next offseason, not steinbach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted July 15, 2006 Author Share Posted July 15, 2006 the issue then is why rent Nate for one year when the team is clearly not in a position to win...wouldnt it have been better to trade him 723259[/snapback] Exactly...If there was no intent to give him the big bucks why not trade him...Even a 2nd rounder will be good....The Redskins did the right thing in trading their CB to the broncos...They will get the better end of that deal when Portis will tear the league this year....Remember Al Saunders is the new OC at DC....the same guy who made Holmes and Johnson stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 the issue then is why rent Nate for one year when the team is clearly not in a position to win...wouldnt it have been better to trade him 723259[/snapback] Because you never know, you just never know, if your team is really in a position to win or not, do you? That's why they play the games. What if Culpepper is a disaster in Miami? What if Tom Brady slips on his skirt before a big game and misses the rest of the season? Maybe the Bills move in there. We should know better than anyone that injuries play a big part in the way a season plays out. Maybe, just maybe, things go your way, and you want top players around when they do. Youboty won't be ready yet this year. Good to let him watch Nate and get a good year of nickel help under his belt before letting him start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts