Ozymandius Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 I don't have to. The experts say he is the top gun at guard. The contract says otherwise. Why did he bother to go to Seattle? To find out that he wasn't going to be paid like the top gun and then came back to SD to save face and take a hometown discount? If he took a hometown discount, no one was going to offer him significanly more... that's because the real experts... the people that put the end product on the field... are leaps and bounds smarter than the oft worshipped media blowhards. IMO... I don't think he got a hometown discount... he got home cooking... a better deal than he'd have gotten anywhere else. That's a fine opinion but it's only opinion. To lecture people based on an assumption that can't be proven seems a bit much. That said, I agree with you that the media suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 Implying, I suppose, that there is such a thing as a more attractive man than me. I'm not sure how many women would agree with you there. But given what just happened to Nate Clements, I think our chances of extending Mangold would have been at least as good as our chances of extending Whitner. Yeah, you're right. Doesn't get much more attractive than this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 Yeah, you're right. Doesn't get much more attractive than this. Compared to me, all other men look like that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 But given what just happened to Nate Clements, I think our chances of extending Mangold would have been at least as good as our chances of extending Whitner. I've gotta say I don't completely nuy into this whole notion that the Bills won't extend a player at some high salary. I guess we'll see in upcoming years with JP, Evans, Peters, etc. But, the Bills could have re-signed Nate if they wanted. They've pretty much spent that much money already. The question is do you spend all that on 1 player when you need 6 (or more)? In a few years, that may change and we won;t have holes all over the place. Therefore we can spend huge bucks and re-sign 1 or 2 players. But, to say "we can't/didn't re-sign Nate because its too much" is not telling the whole story, IMO. It would be more accurate to add "when we have so many other needs" to the end of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 First of all, I read numerous lists of free agents and all of them had Steinbach as the top rated guard, with Dielman second and Dockery usually third but not always. Second of all, Dielman and Steinbach both got 17 million in guaranteed money, which is the only real item in those contracts for the first few years. Dockery, surprisingly, got 18.5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Why on earth are we arguing about who is better? Dielman is good. So is Dockery. I think Dielman chose to stay with SD because they're top to bottom a better team than Seattle. And Seattle got a visit but a brief one. So what. Some of the posts looked more like ultimatums and not simple questions. What is this, a trial? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Why on earth are we arguing about who is better?... So what. Some of the posts looked more like ultimatums and not simple questions. What is this, a trial? I see you have only been here a month or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortured Soul Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Steinbach and Dockery both got the loser's premium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Seriously, give up because you make absolutely no sense. Numerous reports have confirmed that the Seahawks were willing to pay Dielman big bucks and he turned it down. http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=...&id=5089939 http://community.foxsports.com/blogs/NFL_C...for_Chris_Simms A year ago, the Seahawks didn't want to make Steve Hutchinson a $7 million a year guard and they lost him to Minnesota. Now, they can't even buy a $7 million guard when he's on the market. Dielman turned down close to $7 million a year from the Seahawks to return to San Diego. The Seahawks were furious. Watch for them to be extra aggressive trying to sign Kerney or tight end Daniel Graham. They could even sign both of them. I don't have to. The experts say he is the top gun at guard. The contract says otherwise. Why did he bother to go to Seattle? To find out that he wasn't going to be paid like the top gun and then came back to SD to save face and take a hometown discount? If he took a hometown discount, no one was going to offer him significanly more... that's because the real experts... the people that put the end product on the field... are leaps and bounds smarter than the oft worshipped media blowhards. IMO... I don't think he got a hometown discount... he got home cooking... a better deal than he'd have gotten anywhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HBSS151 Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Seriously, give up because you make absolutely no sense. Numerous reports have confirmed that the Seahawks were willing to pay Dielman big bucks and he turned it down. http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=...&id=5089939 http://community.foxsports.com/blogs/NFL_C...for_Chris_Simms From the source: http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/charg...s4chargers.html Some people don't go for the money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 First of all, I read numerous lists of free agents and all of them had Steinbach as the top rated guard, with Dielman second and Dockery usually third but not always. Second of all, Dielman and Steinbach both got 17 million in guaranteed money, which is the only real item in those contracts for the first few years. Dockery, surprisingly, got 18.5. I would guess the reason that Dockery got more guaranteed money is that a large portion of it is deferred and not paid in year 1 as as a signing bonus. You need to know the specifics of each deal, including how much each of them got paid in cash in 2007, to be able to compare the deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 I'd guess that Dishman is financially set for life. The SD area is a nice place to live, especially if you have excess $$$. What's an extra 600K after taxes, if you are already rolling in it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 No... just wrong. In hindsight it was a good pick. He's a starter and future star. The secondary... even with two rookies was not the problem for the Bills D woes... it was LB and DT. And, looking back, you can say that "this" player or "that" player would have been a better pick. Better pick? On what basis? Only on opinion... not fact. You and no one else can say, with any certainty, that Whitner was not the right pick. He proved that he was. You do not know what was going through the minds of the folks that count and make the picks. And, you don't have the benefit of what, specifically, they are doing on offense or defense, what specific type of skills, etc. they're looking for in a player, what positions they are looking at, what conversations they've had with prospective draftees, and what key indicators the Bills brass see as pass/fail in a player for this orginization at this time and juncture. EX... Adalius Thomas... everyone wanted the Bills to sign him. He is a great player, no doubt about it. But, how does he fit in with the schemes the Bills play on D? Would it be optimal useage of his skills? If it isn't, should the coaches change everything to accomodate this one player? This is the Difference between Donahoe and Levy. Donahoe took what he thought was the best available player... regardless of how it fit with the rest of the pieces and entier picture. Levy works close with Jauron and plugs the right players into the puzzle. You or anyone else can opine and have that right... but be fair. Many of the posters just outright blast the $hitt out of Marv and Dick for the path they're taking. Until you're able to see the fruits of their labor on the field, it is truly unfair to do that. They took a 5-11 team in their first year at the helm, significantly overhauled it, had to learn who could fish and who was bait, and improved to 7-9 with the league's toughest schedule... and were in the playoff hunt right up to week 16. Even knowing they had a mulligan in year one, they were able to improve with the 2nd youngest team in the league. With Gandy, Villarial, Fletcher, Shelton, possibly Spikes gone, this team may very well be the youngest team now... depending on what other teams do. I think, under the circumstances Marv and Dick have done well. And, folks need to stop calling Marv out because of his age and saying he doesn't have a clue and people blasting Ralph because he won't spend, and he then goes out and proves them wrong. If you think that's fair and right for folks to continually do that, then know one's going to change your mind. I'm sorry, but you seem to have missed my point. I think that it is great that you are so fond of Marv. Right now my favorite Bill is Jason Peters, and I have no bad words to say about him. That said, you are stating that Whitner was the right pick and any different opinions are baseless. This is where I disagree which is great, wouldn't you say? This is what TSW is for imo. Remember, I want to be wrong. I hope that Whitner makes the Hall of Fame. The thing is, we could have traded down and stockpiled picks. Mangold went at #29. We drafted at the #8 spot, and there were many of teams (according to Marv on Sirius) who wanted our pick. We could have picked up WAY more than another 2nd by dropping to anywhere near #29. Wouldn't you agree? Once again, I am looking at Marv in a different light right now. The man went out and did something daring. Giving huge bucks to a guard was rarely done in his day. He was wise enough to see that things have changed, or listen to someone who knew this. He stated that we needed blockers, and went out and got some. What more can I say? The Bills did very well on Day 2 of the draft in 06. If this team has a good draft in 07, I think that they will be a playoff team. I know that we say it every year, but this is going to be a very important draft. GO BILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts