Dibs Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Dibs, mate. Step away from the Fosters. You're really not thinking. Or you're simply ignoring all facts, logic, and history. Seriously, and this isn't hyperbole, if Ralph Wilson spends "cash to the cap" under your definition, and not mine, it will be the biggest spending spree in NFL free agent history. The Redskins have never done it. I am almost positive that no team has ever done it, with the possible exception of when the Colts gave Manning a 35 million bonus (which I believe they broke into payments) so even they didn't do it. Do you believe this is the Bills plan? When Ralph is crying poor? To spend more cash on bigger contracts than any team ever? Please answer me that question. No team in NFL history has spent 55 million dollars in your definition of "cash to the cap". Not my definition.....& I can see you are thinking it is something different to what it is. What it is is simply spending the cap limit amount. i.e.....this year $109mil. If you give a signing bonus of $10mil.....you count that. If you have a cap cost of $2mil from a previous signing bonus(i.e. an Aaron Schobel)....that does not count towards your cash spending. You're just playing with me aren't you? You showed yourself that last season we covered over $30mil in our FAs & we didn't hand out a large signing bonus amongst the lot. You had it exactly right when you wrote in post #6 we would have over 50 million and could sign a lot of pretty good talent, including Nate. when you responded to Jimbob2232.....who had it perfectly written.It ends up being not too dissimilar to the situation without cash-to-cap. $30mil counted under cap.....an extra $15mil SB to NC.....an extra $15mil SB or so to Steinbach & a few others. $50mil goes quickly. At least this way, we won't be spending too many future dollars now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 He asked about free agency, which doesn't count rookies. Yeah, but the 30 million the Bills will allegedly spend will include rookies, which will leave less than 30 million to be spent on FAs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Not my definition.....& I can see you are thinking it is something different to what it is.What it is is simply spending the cap limit amount. i.e.....this year $109mil. If you give a signing bonus of $10mil.....you count that. If you have a cap cost of $2mil from a previous signing bonus(i.e. an Aaron Schobel)....that does not count towards your cash spending. You're just playing with me aren't you? You showed yourself that last season we covered over $30mil in our FAs & we didn't hand out a large signing bonus amongst the lot. You had it exactly right when you wrote in post #6 when you responded to Jimbob2232.....who had it perfectly written. It ends up being not too dissimilar to the situation without cash-to-cap. $30mil counted under cap.....an extra $15mil SB to NC.....an extra $15mil SB or so to Steinbach & a few others. $50mil goes quickly. At least this way, we won't be spending too many future dollars now. You could sign Nate to a 18 million bonus, and 2 million in salary which would be 20 million, Steinbach to a 13 mil bonus and 2 mil salary, that's 35, June to a 10 mil and 2 mil salary, that's 47 million and still have a few million. If you are using your definition. Surely "CASH to the CAP" cannot mean, in any sense of the words, future salaries which do not have to be paid in cash nor count toward this year's cap. Do you believe this is what they think they can do? Of course not. They are going to spend for about 4-5 guys. Marv came right out and said so. The total amount they will spend, counting bonuses and salary for this year, will be less than last year, about 30 mil, and no big names. That's what he said. We will be able to get 3-4 Larry Tripplet and Robert Royal and Josh Reed sized signings and that is it, none of which were even starters on their previous teams . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 They are going to spend for about 4-5 guys. Marv came right out and said so. Kelly, just nitpicking here - Marv said they will be bringing in 4-5 guys. I heard that as 4-5 interviews and not actual acquisitions (unless we have a 100% strike rate which is unrealistic). Even if we get 2 really good guys from the outside, I will be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Kelly, just nitpicking here - Marv said they will be bringing in 4-5 guys. I heard that as 4-5 interviews and not actual acquisitions (unless we have a 100% strike rate which is unrealistic). Even if we get 2 really good guys from the outside, I will be happy. I think you're probably misinterpreting. There is no chance of that, what if none of them sign? He means we will sign 4-5 FA's as opposed to 9-10 last year. We have at the very least, 10 positions to fill. Two really good guys, though, is all you can hope for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 I appreciate that RW is fighting to keep small market teams competitive, but in the near term, this fighting is going to negatively impact our ability to compete. No way RW is going to spend a lot of money while revenue sharing has yet to be resolved. The funny thing is that I don't think most Bills fans want the Bills to spend wildly. I know that I would like to see the Bills re-sign Clements and Kelsay and then get a guard in free agency. That would make me very happy (but it is not going to happen). The thing is this isn't baseball. The playing field is mostly level when it comes to the differences between small market and big market teams. The big equalizer is that television contract. However, that's the curse for fans of small market teams because of that large chunk of money received from TV the temptation for the small market owner is to go "Bidwell" and just sit back and make money whether the stadium is full or empty. I'm not positive that's what we're seeing here, but it sure is starting to smell that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I 90 Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 You showed yourself that last season we covered over $30mil in our FAs & we didn't hand out a large signing bonus amongst the lot. O.K. , it is possible to spend "cash to cap" up to the max using last year's scheme -- by adding 8 or 9 mediocrities or questionables who don't require large signing bonuses. Even if we wanted such leftovers, I am not sure that we have room for them all. It would take a freakish fantasy footballer mentality to make the numbers come out. Adding the few "desireable" players (most of the NFL 's plan) and their bonuses puts the Bills into the artificial cashtocapworld. They must be working from some real NFL cap number already -- 109 million doesn't seem remotely possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 These are just ballpark figures, and some of them may be a little low, some high, and I rounded off to the nearest million. But these are close. Triplett - 8 mil Royal - 5 mil Bowen - 2 mil Peerless - 4 mil Josh - 5 mil Reyes - 2 mil A. Thomas - 1 mil K. Thomas - 1 mil A. Davis - 1 mil Nall - 4 mil So about 30-33 million ballpark. But that was ten guys, including one of our own, in Josh. This year they are thinking of half that many, perhaps 5. So you can double the contracts and get better players. It's not wholly bad, but it rules out guys like Steinbach and Nate, and probably any of the top guards and LBs, except perhaps June. I wonder which one were the busts. Reyes and Bowen for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Free Agency 2007 is less than 2 weeks away and Friday Buffalo laid out their plan for how they intend to conduct it. To date we've heard a lot of talk with no big decisions having been made. Eventually, they'll need to commit to someone and spend money. Let's wait and see who they pursue in free agency before we rant against the front office. I'm not going to speculate on what players the front office wants to or will get. IMO, if the 2007 Free Agency period is like most other years, the quality, high end free agents will be signed before the first week is over. You will know where this team aims to go after that week is over. Should we stand by and pick up the average free agents again, don't expect much. The NFL may be a watered down product, but you must maintain some talent in order to remain competitive. Losing three quality players from your defense and replacing them with lesser talented players does not make us better. Especially when that defense was ranked near the bottom in most categories If Marv doesn't have much faith in rookies contributing, and I think many of ours played last season out of pure necessity, free agency will be our way to replace and improve. If we go after more moderately priced players, be prepared to expect less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts