Kelly the Dog Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Hey, I am all for Marv being a man of his word and not screwing over players. But that doesn't apply to teams, and the Bills were never compensated by the league for being completely screwed over by the Colts in the Will Wolford incident. The Pats just acquired Welker from the Dolphins. I am not sure about this but what I think happened was this: The Pats were going to sign him to a ridiculous contract, the 38 mil one, that I think had a poison pill in it that the Dolphins couldn't match. Rather than going through all the nonsense of waiting the week and then not resigning him, they caved and agreed to a trade with the Pats for him. I would imagine the real contract that Welker signs with the Pats won't be for 38 million, but who knows with all the craziness going around. So maybe Marv should do this with the Colts guard, or that DT from the Titans. Use the poison pill to get a player of our liking, and then maybe work out a trade for him, either a pick or a player. I hate the poison pill myself, but if teams are doing it all over the league, we should too, if only to make them put an end to it sooner. Who cares if the Titans hate us, it wouldn't stop any player from coming here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhg Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 FYI- It was Will Wolford that went to the Colts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Call it payback for HomeJob ThrowUp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 5, 2007 Author Share Posted March 5, 2007 FYI- It was Will Wolford that went to the Colts Right. Doh! I will change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 6, 2007 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 So they offer him 38 million in the poison pill, and they sign him for 18 million. Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 With this poison pill tactic teams are using now, you wonder why anybody would bother trying to sign an RFA the old-fashioned way. The league needs to put a stop to this quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeBillsDrive Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 So they offer him 38 million in the poison pill, and they sign him for 18 million. Nice. I hate to admit it but Pioli is brilliant. From the $14,000 scouting assistant and gofer that drove Bellicheck to the airport in Cleveland, to one of the league's best personnel men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 I agree with exactly what you're saying. But... if you see something that's wrong and you disagree with it, do you do it too just because everyone else is doing it? Or do you take the high road and lead by example? I try to do the right thing regardless of what every one else is doing, and I'm glad Marv is running the team by doing the right thing and treating players as people rather than just as commodities to be traded, bought, and sold. I know it's not the best business sense. I know it often puts the team (and myself) at a disadvantage. We lose players like Nate with no compensation. But, I can sleep better making bad business decisions albeit good personal moral choices. Maybe Marv thinks similarly. And maybe one day the good karma will turn around and shine on our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeBillsDrive Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 We lose players like Nate with no compensation. But, I can sleep better making bad business decisions albeit good personal moral choices. Maybe Marv thinks similarly. And maybe one day the good karma will turn around and shine on our team. Nate can thank us for his lucky luck: "The winners -- Nate Clements: First, Clements should thank the Buffalo Bills. They're the people who last year promised him they wouldn't make him a franchise player again." http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/story/10040633 Unfortunately, we don't get any credits for taking the moral high road. But I'm glad we did. I hope you're right about karma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 6, 2007 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 I agree with exactly what you're saying. But... if you see something that's wrong and you disagree with it, do you do it too just because everyone else is doing it? Or do you take the high road and lead by example? I try to do the right thing regardless of what every one else is doing, and I'm glad Marv is running the team by doing the right thing and treating players as people rather than just as commodities to be traded, bought, and sold. I know it's not the best business sense. I know it often puts the team (and myself) at a disadvantage. We lose players like Nate with no compensation. But, I can sleep better making bad business decisions albeit good personal moral choices. Maybe Marv thinks similarly. And maybe one day the good karma will turn around and shine on our team. Generally I agree with what you're saying. And I wouldn't advocate going after a player that didn't want to come to the Bills. But most of the players that were tendered, really weren't all that sought after by their own teams, except in the high tender cases like Michael Turner. So I really don't feel like the Bills would be screwing over people as much as liberating a player who would be paid a lot more and wanted to be here. I don't think it would be bad karma, although I do truly believe the NFL needs to stop it ASAP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Nate can thank us for his lucky luck: "The winners -- Nate Clements: First, Clements should thank the Buffalo Bills. They're the people who last year promised him they wouldn't make him a franchise player again." http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/story/10040633 Unfortunately, we don't get any credits for taking the moral high road. But I'm glad we did. I hope you're right about karma. You're absolutely right. But, as another poster pointed out... Nate and Dockery have the same agent. Dockery signed with us without visiting any other team. So, maybe Nate (or at least his agent) did thank us? Who knows, but its an interesting thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Generally I agree with what you're saying. And I wouldn't advocate going after a player that didn't want to come to the Bills. But most of the players that were tendered, really weren't all that sought after by their own teams, except in the high tender cases like Michael Turner. So I really don't feel like the Bills would be screwing over people as much as liberating a player who would be paid a lot more and wanted to be here. I don't think it would be bad karma, although I do truly believe the NFL needs to stop it ASAP. Good point. And, believe me, I'll never pretend to know the ins and outs of these player moves. If its done properly, I can definitely see your point and would agree with them whole heartedly. I'm just saying I like many of the moves Marv makes because many seem to be good for the team and they're done with character and class. And that makes me prouder than ever to cheer for Marv and the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I 90 Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 And, believe me, I'll never pretend to know the ins and outs of these player moves. This is just a strange story. New England gives up a seventh in order to steal a little money back from Wes Welker ? Anyways, giving any kind of money to Welker should be poison pill enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts