LynchMob23 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Laughingstock is definitely something bandied about far too easy 'round here. The Bills, when we lose, are just like Seattle. Irrelevant to the general football population. Laughingstock? Not really at all - just because some folks are getting razzed by fools at work doesn't make the Bills a laughingstock. You, maybe. Not the Bills. And of course, like previously mentioned, don't forget that the cap is a little more fluid than that - we have to re-sign Peters, we'll have Kelsay, Denney and a few other people off the books next year and assuming the cap status vis a vis the CBA, it may not even matter when we have to re-sign Edwards, Lynch, McGee, Whitner, Walker or Poszlusny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Teams are not built thru FA's, they are built thru the draft... Anyone with any clue knows that a good team is built through all avenues, not just the draft. Especially a team that drafts as pathetic as we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Agreed. This team has not made itself any better at all through FA and I don't expect a good draft, but hey let's all go buy season tickets and don't forget your T.O. jerseys faithful fans!! 7-9 again. 7-9 again if we are lucky, we don't even have a complete offensive line yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 An interesting article from PFW that I remember reading a few weeks ago: http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL/A...WHI/default.htm While the nationwide recession has affected all 32 teams, the Bills have the added handicap of having been cash-strapped even before the economy went south. There’s a pervasive feeling throughout the league that there will be fewer big-buck, blockbuster deals in the upcoming free-agency period than we’re accustomed to seeing, and Buffalo could find it particularly difficult to execute its desired fortifications. At least some of that reality can be traced to decisions of prior years that have since backfired. Take the offensive line, for example. For a club that historically has been loath to dish out top dollar to outside veteran free agents, the Bills’ heavy investments in OLG Derrick Dockery ($49 million) and ORT Langston Walker ($25 million) in the ’07 offseason stood as bold deviations from their previously established mantra. Yet neither has approached his contract value, and the team’s long-term financial commitment to them hampers their maneuverability going forward. A similar situation exists on the defensive line, where DEs Aaron Schobel and Chris Kelsay are the owners of contracts worth a combined $74 million, with Kelsay’s running through the 2010 season and Schobel’s not expiring until 2013. Kelsay’s impact since inking his deal in ’07 has been nothing more than solid, whereas the most telling conclusion about Schobel’s contribution can be found in unheralded backup Ryan Denney’s superior play when he replaced Schobel in the lineup for a stubborn foot injury that cost Schobel the second half of last season. Thanks Marv. Your legacy lives on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Laughingstock is definitely something bandied about far too easy 'round here. The Bills, when we lose, are just like Seattle. Irrelevant to the general football population. Laughingstock? Not really at all - just because some folks are getting razzed by fools at work doesn't make the Bills a laughingstock. You, maybe. Not the Bills. And of course, like previously mentioned, don't forget that the cap is a little more fluid than that - we have to re-sign Peters, we'll have Kelsay, Denney and a few other people off the books next year and assuming the cap status vis a vis the CBA, it may not even matter when we have to re-sign Edwards, Lynch, McGee, Whitner, Walker or Poszlusny. Fear not about re-signing Whitner. It just aint happening. He will be gone about 20 seconds after he is a ufa and we will draft another first round db to replace him, if not 2. Dick Levy will probably get the ball rolling in April. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macaroni Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 According to the contracts.....LINKTO=6.5 Hangartner=1.9 Fitz=1.8 Florence=(6.6 over 2 years), say 3.3 Thomas=bugger all.....1.5 tops After the Dockery cutting(which saved $400K in cap) we had over $25mil. Doing the math.....those signings would be around $15mil This does indeed leave us with $10mil under the cap. OK so the numbers work out ...... but what do they really mean? If I remember correctly the Redskins were something like $8 or $9 Million below the cap BEFORE the FA period and they signed the $100 million dollar man, paid big bucks for our cast off turnstile, and had another large FA signing (I'm old and can't rememer who) in the first couple of days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Britbillsfan Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Peters could put us VERY close to the cap. (if he gets a new deal) Peters currently has a cap hit of a little over $4 million, a new contract will probably add another $5 million or so to it (assuming the hit from the signing bonus will be spread over the length of the contract). Signing Peters will leave us with still some to spend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiobuffalo Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 OK so the numbers work out ...... but what do they really mean? If I remember correctly the Redskins were something like $8 or $9 Million below the cap BEFORE the FA period and they signed the $100 million dollar man, paid big bucks for our cast off turnstile, and had another large FA signing (I'm old and can't rememer who) in the first couple of days. Deangelo Hall to like a 40 million dollar contract Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Laughingstock is definitely something bandied about far too easy 'round here. The Bills, when we lose, are just like Seattle. Irrelevant to the general football population. Laughingstock? Not really at all - just because some folks are getting razzed by fools at work doesn't make the Bills a laughingstock. You, maybe. Not the Bills. And of course, like previously mentioned, don't forget that the cap is a little more fluid than that - we have to re-sign Peters, we'll have Kelsay, Denney and a few other people off the books next year and assuming the cap status vis a vis the CBA, it may not even matter when we have to re-sign Edwards, Lynch, McGee, Whitner, Walker or Poszlusny. It isn't at work that you get razzled, read the national media. This is a team that couldn't even get the paperwork straight to complete a trade and get an extra draft pick for Dockery. This is the team that gave up a franchise for J.P. Losman and Rob Johnson. This is the team that hasn't been to the playoffs since 1999-longest in the NFL. This is the team that since Levy has left has changed coaches every 3 years for what 16 years now? This is the team that if they do pay Peters anywhere close to what he wants, that will eat up for the most part the rest of the cap space, and then when he plays like he did last year, will be another 7-9 season at best. Shall I go one or do you get my point? So no it isn't me that is the Laughingstock, I am just a realist who has had his heart ripped out by the franchise that I have loved for over 40 years. If you can't see any of this through your overly optimistic point of view, maybe we have a new laughingstock here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macaroni Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Deangelo Hall to like a 40 million dollar contract That's it ..... thanks Buffalo start FA period with 27 million and signs; T.O. ............ 6.8 Million Hangatrner .. 3.3 Million Fitz ............. 3.3 Million Skins start FA period with 8/9 million and signs; Hanesworth .. 100 Million Hall .............. 40 Million Dockery ....... 26.5 Million What is wrong with these numbers (I know the numbers are total contract numbers .... but the skins cap hit has to be HUGE) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 If what you are sayng is correct, what a big disappointment this Bills are again. They signed all unknowns, mostly career backups and one malcontent aging star, who has as much of a chance of ripping the team apart as he does helping it. I hope it isn't true, but if it is, it only furthers the fact that we are the laughing stock of the NFL. You have to be a realist here...we signed a premium target in T.O. and filled holes with other FA's. We need room under the cap to sign rookies too, so if they would have signed another larger contract we would currently have more holes and probably have gotten less out of free agency... They actually had a pretty good offseason filling holes reasonably well and bringing in a big time impact player...it was better than most teams off seasons... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 It isn't at work that you get razzled, read the national media. This is a team that couldn't even get the paperwork straight to complete a trade and get an extra draft pick for Dockery. This is the team that gave up a franchise for J.P. Losman and Rob Johnson. This is the team that hasn't been to the playoffs since 1999-longest in the NFL. This is the team that since Levy has left has changed coaches every 3 years for what 16 years now? This is the team that if they do pay Peters anywhere close to what he wants, that will eat up for the most part the rest of the cap space, and then when he plays like he did last year, will be another 7-9 season at best. Shall I go one or do you get my point? So no it isn't me that is the Laughingstock, I am just a realist who has had his heart ripped out by the franchise that I have loved for over 40 years. If you can't see any of this through your overly optimistic point of view, maybe we have a new laughingstock here. Seriously, the only place this team is a laughing stock is amongst these message boards and our own fans. We are no where near a laughing stock anywhere else. Wilson is respected and the organization is respected. I have friends in the NFL still playing and in some FO's and even coaching in some capacity, and they all say the same thing. When we win, the media loves it, when we lose we get very little press. Teams like the Raiders become jokes in the media when they lose...they are about the only laughing stock left in the NFL because of Al Davis. Detroit was numero uno becuase they held on to Matt Millen, but with Millen out they likely lose a little bit of the laughing stock title and fall behind Oakland...outside of those 2 teams, no team is considered a joke... The media for the most part loves the Bills when we win...we are like the underdog, blue collar team that people want to get behind. In fact, last year, lots of sportscasters kept saying its good for the NFL when we are winning...people like it. And when we are losing, we dont get hammered, we just dont get much of any kind of press... We have had VERY few seasons where we were totally irrelevant. Most seasons we are still alive for a shot at the playoffs deep into the season... So, its the "Negative Nancy's" on this board and amongst OUR FAN BASE that use terms like laughing stock, a joke, etc...get over it already...either get behind the team or go get a pacifier and some cheese to go with all your whine...someone call the whaaa-bulance.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo1983 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Wow. i hope this isn't true. If so.. ummm... Maybe next year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 The Bills have a few ways to increase their cap figure. NFL teams use what are called "Not Likely to be Earned Incentives" to increase their cap figures on an annual basis. These incentives are built into contracts and count against the salary cap for a given year but if they're not earned in a given year, the total of the bonus is added to the salary cap next season. I'll use Spencer Johnson as an example. If Johnson was to earn an extra $1.5 million last season if he picked up ten sacks, that $1.5 million counted against the 2008 salary cap. Since Johnson obviously did not pick up ten sacks that $1.5 million would then be added to the $123 million figure this year. That "increases" Buffalo's actual salary cap figure. Earlier this year Buffalo's NLTBE Incentives were projected roughly at $10 million. That increases Buffalo's actual cap figure to $133 million, and their actual spending money to $34 million. Don't worry, we got plenty to spend. I hope Clumpy addresses this and verifies what I'm saying. Let me put it another way. Do you REALLY think that Buffalo has overspent with the salary cap??!!! Unfortunately, this all has no impact whatsoever on cash to cap teams like Buffalo. The Bills will not spend more than the money they are given by the league, which equals the salary cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 That's what I thought at first too. Buffalo came into the offseason seventh(?) (http://www.askthecommish.com/salarycap/numbers.asp, http://moondogsports.com/2009/02/27/2009-n...ary-cap-status/) in the league in cap space behind Tampa. Owens is a $6.5M hit, Dockery being cut was a $5.4M hit, Hangartner will be less than $4M, Fitzpatrick is what, $2M? That's $16M, we came in $27M under the cap, so that's $10M-11M under the cap. At the #11 pick we won't have to spend a fortune on rookies, so we can still bring in a LG and/or OLB, but yeah, it is getting a little tight. Here is the advantage of operating under cash to cap. Dockery's cap hit does not affect us in the slightest. It was all counted against the cap of the year Dockery was signed. Under cash to cap, cutting Dockery has no negative impact. It only saves us the salary we would have paid him this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 We're finished I tell ya finished!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Peters currently has a cap hit of a little over $4 million, a new contract will probably add another $5 million or so to it (assuming the hit from the signing bonus will be spread over the length of the contract). Signing Peters will leave us with still some to spend. Another difference of cash to cap is that signing bonuses are NOT spread over the length of the contract. Peters's entire signing bonus plus the additional salary paid for him this year will all be applied to THIS year's cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trolls_r_us Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 if you think the Bills are cheap, look at the small market Chicago Bears.... They are hampered by playing in only the nation's third largest city, and lack all the economic benefits the Bills have. Therefore, their GM is apparently "handcuffed" and the team cash-strapped. Their off-season has been the DEFINITION of boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Britbillsfan Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Another difference of cash to cap is that signing bonuses are NOT spread over the length of the contract. Peters's entire signing bonus plus the additional salary paid for him this year will all be applied to THIS year's cap. No. As far as the signing bonus is concerned vis-a-vis the salary cap it is the same as any other team. The cash to cap has no bearing as to the rules governing the salary cap, it is an in-house thing. (I think this came up in another thread and was confirmed to be the case). However, using cash to cap, Peters signing bonus will count against that, all this year. Well, that is my understanding of it and I do not see why a team's internal spending limits effects the league wide rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SABURZFAN Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 i'd like to see the Bills go after Scheffler to fill the TE position. i'm sure he's well under the $10 million reportedly left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts