BillsVet Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Reading about those RFA's on the Bills website got me thinking. We know big name UFA's will always get their money because they have performed at a high level. Unless the team spends big in free agency (unlikely at this point) RFA's and lesser priced UFA's remain the Bills best means for stocking the team besides the draft. Going after RFA's who might have potential but are buried on another team's depth chart at first seems like a smart thing to do. Of course there's no guarantee and most of them are former 3rd round or lower picks who aren't established players. Last year Buffalo pursued OT Reggie Wells from Arizona and DT Israel Idonije from Chicago. I've got to believe they've identified other RFA's that can be had for less than some UFA's and in exchange for low round picks. What I'd like to know is do people view this as another cheap-out by the front office or something the Bills are ahead of compared to the rest of the NFL? IMO, I'm not sold on devoting too much time to these guys. There's some cheap young talent available, but it seems more like mining for gold than a reliable way to improve the team. Hargrove hopefully is the exception, but if we don't acquire some established talent soon, we're looking at 7-9 or 8-8 again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jokeman Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Reading about those RFA's on the Bills website got me thinking. We know big name UFA's will always get their money because they have performed at a high level. Unless the team spends big in free agency (unlikely at this point) RFA's and lesser priced UFA's remain the Bills best means for stocking the team besides the draft. Going after RFA's who might have potential but are buried on another team's depth chart at first seems like a smart thing to do. Of course there's no guarantee and most of them are former 3rd round or lower picks who aren't established players. Last year Buffalo pursued OT Reggie Wells from Arizona and DT Israel Idonije from Chicago. I've got to believe they've identified other RFA's that can be had for less than some UFA's and in exchange for low round picks. What I'd like to know is do people view this as another cheap-out by the front office or something the Bills are ahead of compared to the rest of the NFL? IMO, I'm not sold on devoting too much time to these guys. There's some cheap young talent available, but it seems more like mining for gold than a reliable way to improve the team. Hargrove hopefully is the exception, but if we don't acquire some established talent soon, we're looking at 7-9 or 8-8 again. I haven't really looked at the RFA landscape as don't consider it an easy option. As you stated we swung last year two times and missed two times. Now according to the story you are referring to teams can place a new tender that would end up costing teams a 2nd Round pick which would make the liklihood of getting a quality RFA even smaller. In terms of the history of RFA we covered the topic a little bit a while bit in this older thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Reading about those RFA's on the Bills website got me thinking. We know big name UFA's will always get their money because they have performed at a high level. Unless the team spends big in free agency (unlikely at this point) RFA's and lesser priced UFA's remain the Bills best means for stocking the team besides the draft. Going after RFA's who might have potential but are buried on another team's depth chart at first seems like a smart thing to do. Of course there's no guarantee and most of them are former 3rd round or lower picks who aren't established players. Last year Buffalo pursued OT Reggie Wells from Arizona and DT Israel Idonije from Chicago. I've got to believe they've identified other RFA's that can be had for less than some UFA's and in exchange for low round picks. What I'd like to know is do people view this as another cheap-out by the front office or something the Bills are ahead of compared to the rest of the NFL? IMO, I'm not sold on devoting too much time to these guys. There's some cheap young talent available, but it seems more like mining for gold than a reliable way to improve the team. Hargrove hopefully is the exception, but if we don't acquire some established talent soon, we're looking at 7-9 or 8-8 again. If you've seen a RFA play a bit, like what you see...why not? That's not being cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted February 14, 2007 Author Share Posted February 14, 2007 It seems to me they're going to do things a little out of the ordinary to bring in younger players who may or may not have talent. Hargrove was the first real player they got in here who was an impending RFA. I just don't think it's worth it to try at some of these guys, although when you've got a guy who has been in the league for a few years, you know better what you've got in them better than you would a 3rd, 4th, or 5th round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 If you've seen a RFA play a bit, like what you see...why not? That's not being cheap. It's way less of a crap shoot than takinga flyer on a mid-roudn draft pick who has never played a down in the NFL. Withj RFA's, you have film on a guy performing against NFL competition. This is a no-brainer. Especially with so much room under the cap where the 1 week wait will not hold up other FA offers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YOOOOOO Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Depends on the RFA really...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 If you've seen a RFA play a bit, like what you see...why not? That's not being cheap. I've said it before and I'll say it again...unless the team structures a deal that is unlikely to be matched it puts a team behind in their attempt to better their talent. Last year we signed two to offer sheats and then had to wait 1 week to find out whether the offer would be matched. In both cases it was. Who did we miss out on during that 1 week period? What did we have to show for it in the end? My dislike isn't about money, it's about the end result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt in KC Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 I've said it before and I'll say it again...unless the team structures a deal that is unlikely to be matched it puts a team behind in their attempt to better their talent. Last year we signed two to offer sheats and then had to wait 1 week to find out whether the offer would be matched. In both cases it was. Who did we miss out on during that 1 week period? What did we have to show for it in the end? My dislike isn't about money, it's about the end result. I'd like to think they have the resources to prioritize and only pursue RFA's as a lower priority than these better options you're worried they're missing. Do you really think they might not call an UFA because they were too busy thinking/talking/waiting on a RFA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Do you really think they might not call an UFA because they were too busy thinking/talking/waiting on a RFA? If they play the same position...definitely yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt in KC Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 If they play the same position...definitely yes. But again, I think they can prioritze, at least that much. I tink if they are going after the RFA first, this means they think the RFA has significantly more value: either more talent, or cheaper, even considering the "cost" of losing a draft pick. Looking at Denney last year though, it's hard to imagine the RFA would have been a better chioce.... I do understand your point though. To be tempted into pursuing the RFA first, you might miss the window of opportunity to sign your second choice (UFA) if they don't wait around. But, besides the top FA's signing in the first week or so of free agency, I'm not sure a week is incredibly long to wait. Free agency is long period, and the remaining players may well wait if it means more (team) competition driving up their offer(s), or simply having a team make them an offer. Denney was still there after the RFA offer was matched. But, I guess I'm assuming Denney was their second choice and that they weren't looking at someone else who signed elsewhere.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I liked the way that Indy's LG Lilja played this season. I'd take him if the Colts can't come up with 2nd Round money ($1.5m)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In space no one can hear Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I liked the way that Indy's LG Lilja played this season. I'd take him if the Colts can't come up with 2nd Round money ($1.5m)... Agreed Astrobot. He would be a very good pickup. As far as RFA....It can be a hassle-but I like when my team doesn't leave any stone unturned when looking to build a winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogger Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Randy Starks would be worth a 2nd round pick, there is no way we could find that talent at DT in the 2nd round Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauderswr80 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Having players come to Buffalo that fit the system is more important then the big names..... Names dont get you anything.....players who fit here well and are productive is what makes your team a winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts