Charles Romes Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Ross Tucker opined this morning on NFL radio that the Rhodes is still part of the Bills' plans for weeks 1-3 but that was cut in view of a league rule which forces teams to pay veterans for a full year if they are on the original 53 man roster. He believes the Bills calculated that Rhodes will clear waivers and speculated that the Bills will re-sign him over the next few days. By cutting and re-signing Rhodes, rather than having him as part of the original 53 man team, the Bills will be obligated to pay Rhodes for only the weeks he is on the team rather than the full year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 I thought that only applies if he's signed after the first game? Because players on the opening day rosters are guaranteed their year's salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Sounds like a good career move from Rhodes vantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lets_go_bills Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Ross Tucker opined this morning on NFL radio that the Rhodes is still part of the Bills' plans for weeks 1-3 but that was cut in view of a league rule which forces teams to pay veterans for a full year if they are on the original 53 man roster. He believes the Bills calculated that Rhodes will clear waivers and speculated that the Bills will re-sign him over the next few days. By cutting and re-signing Rhodes, rather than having him as part of the original 53 man team, the Bills will be obligated to pay Rhodes for only the weeks he is on the team rather than the full year. If that's true then it's a good move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 I thought that only applies if he's signed after the first game? Because players on the opening day rosters are guaranteed their year's salary. Thought so too. Maybe they are willing to roll the dice on the first game. They do save $150,000 roster bonus plus being able to take him on a per game basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Romes Posted September 6, 2009 Author Share Posted September 6, 2009 I thought that only applies if he's signed after the first game? Because players on the opening day rosters are guaranteed their year's salary. This might be the case. Tucker talked about the Bills renting Rhodes for two weeks. Originally I thought Tucker's reference to two weeks was just because Tucker made a mistake about the time of Lynch's suspension. He may have been suggesting the Bills will re-sign Rhodes AFTER week 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Thought so too. Maybe they are willing to roll the dice on the first game. They do save $150,000 roster bonus plus being able to take him on a per game basis. I can understand it if it's for after game 1. The Patriots do this all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 I can understand it if it's for after game 1. The Patriots do this all the time. was just on with Ross, and he shared his opinion with me. it's possible, heck, anything's possible. my one thought though is whether Rhodes is willing to re-sign with a team that just cut him. jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 was just on with Ross, and he shared his opinion with me. it's possible, heck, anything's possible.my one thought though is whether Rhodes is willing to re-sign with a team that just cut him. Well, the Bills do have that front-runner for the Super Bowl status to offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 was just on with Ross, and he shared his opinion with me. it's possible, heck, anything's possible.my one thought though is whether Rhodes is willing to re-sign with a team that just cut him. jw didn't he return to Indy after being cut ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 was just on with Ross, and he shared his opinion with me. it's possible, heck, anything's possible.my one thought though is whether Rhodes is willing to re-sign with a team that just cut him. jw 2 game checks (assuming he would be cut after week 3) or 0 game checks? hmmm... decisions, decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gale Gilbert Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 It would be a good move for the Bills if they rented Rhodes, but why wouldn't Rhodes try and sign with another team for the full season first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Thinking positively, if Rhodes gets an offer to play for a team with an offense, it won't be impossible to find another average Joe pedestrian RB off the street for the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 didn't he return to Indy after being cut ? he did, but that was after a a tough season in Oakland. players, in my experience, don't take kindly to being cut by a team one day and then having the team want them back the next, and for less money. ... now, i'm not saying it's not possible, but Rhodes might want certain assurances going forward ... and i wouldn't be sure the Bills -- having cut him already -- would be willing to commit. jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Did the Bills do this a couple years ago with a veteran DB? Vincent maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albany,n.y. Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 It would be a good move for the Bills if they rented Rhodes, but why wouldn't Rhodes try and sign with another team for the full season first? Because nobody wants him for opening day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 was just on with Ross, and he shared his opinion with me. it's possible, heck, anything's possible.my one thought though is whether Rhodes is willing to re-sign with a team that just cut him. Compared to not working and thus getting paid, I think he'd do it. But again, the question I have is whether they can do this and have him available for the first game, or if they have to wait until after the first game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Ross Tucker opined this morning on NFL radio that the Rhodes is still part of the Bills' plans for weeks 1-3 but that was cut in view of a league rule which forces teams to pay veterans for a full year if they are on the original 53 man roster. He believes the Bills calculated that Rhodes will clear waivers and speculated that the Bills will re-sign him over the next few days. By cutting and re-signing Rhodes, rather than having him as part of the original 53 man team, the Bills will be obligated to pay Rhodes for only the weeks he is on the team rather than the full year. well--the Bills sure are smart with money..we made sure he didnt get that 150k.-and at the same time we are paying uhmmm... uhhh.. oh thats right 17 million this yr(correct me if Im low) for major contributors Kelsay Schobel and Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 I certainly hope that's the case because I'd much rather see him whiff on blocks for only a couple of games than an entire season. I love the fact that some people are actually hoping we bring back this guy considering that to do so not ONE other NFL team would have to want him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 I certainly hope that's the case because I'd much rather see him whiff on blocks for only a couple of games than an entire season. I love the fact that some people are actually hoping we bring back this guy considering that to do so not ONE other NFL team would have to want him. At this point, he'd be useless for any other team, having missed all of their off-season, training camp, and pre-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Did the Bills do this a couple years ago with a veteran DB? Vincent maybe? they did not. Vincent was placed on IR shortly into the season and then sought his release once healthy in order to sign with another team, which became the redskins. and when he sought his release from the Bills, Vincent made it clear he was not interested in coming back to Buffalo, even though he liked playing here. jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 At this point, he'd be useless for any other team, having missed all of their off-season, training camp, and pre-season. He's a running back and a veteran one at that. Any other position I'd agree but not a veteran RB. Regardless, no team would bring him in as anything more than a third at this point. Give what I've seen this preseason I'd seriously doubt any team wants him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChasBB Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 If that's true then it's a good move. However, if Rhodes is truly an integral part of their plans, then it is quite a risk to assume he'll clear waivers. It would seem there might be a number of teams that would like to have a veteran of his caliber on their roster. Guess we'll just see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Renting Rhodes seems really Mickey Mouse to me, considering the total payroll is $129 million. Just because you CAN do something according to the rules, doesn't make it right. Low class, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Wow, what an investigative reporter! Looking into the behind the scenes of cutting a3rd string running back! Woodward and Bernstein, look out!! This has been a tough week having to with posters like you, and it's made me far too cranky to deal with having to respond to this mindless banal, and plane disrespect from you and at least two other posters, jwssswhoever and Spartacus. As a result, I'm planning to take some time off this board to cool down and reconsider. I've got a busy week ahead of me, and there's no point respond to this baloney. As much as I could try to ignore it, it just rubs me the wrong way. To all those with whom I've shared many good and informed exchanges with, thank you all. It's been a pleasure. I hope to be back at some point, but at this point it all seems too trying to deal with. Sincerely, John Wawrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Nails Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 This has been a tough week having to with posters like you, and it's made me far too cranky to deal with having to respond to this mindless banal, and plane disrespect from you and at least two other posters, jwssswhoever and Spartacus.As a result, I'm planning to take some time off this board to cool down and reconsider. I've got a busy week ahead of me, and there's no point respond to this baloney. As much as I could try to ignore it, it just rubs me the wrong way. To all those with whom I've shared many good and informed exchanges with, thank you all. It's been a pleasure. I hope to be back at some point, but at this point it all seems too trying to deal with. Sincerely, John Wawrow. John, I and many others (the vast majority) of this board greatly appreciate your contributions. Please do not let a few knuckle heads dissuade you from participating in TBD discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 However, if Rhodes is truly an integral part of their plans, then it is quite a risk to assume he'll clear waivers. It would seem there might be a number of teams that would like to have a veteran of his caliber on their roster. Guess we'll just see what happens. Teams already passed on him once at that money. I doubt anyone is all that interested now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 fwiw, both jwwssswhatever and Asszaloha are trolls whom are going to be handed their hats very soon. This has been a tough week having to with posters like you, and it's made me far too cranky to deal with having to respond to this mindless banal, and plane disrespect from you and at least two other posters, jwssswhoever and Spartacus.As a result, I'm planning to take some time off this board to cool down and reconsider. I've got a busy week ahead of me, and there's no point respond to this baloney. As much as I could try to ignore it, it just rubs me the wrong way. To all those with whom I've shared many good and informed exchanges with, thank you all. It's been a pleasure. I hope to be back at some point, but at this point it all seems too trying to deal with. Sincerely, John Wawrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 they did not. Vincent was placed on IR shortly into the season and then sought his release once healthy in order to sign with another team, which became the redskins. and when he sought his release from the Bills, Vincent made it clear he was not interested in coming back to Buffalo, even though he liked playing here. jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GR8PRKN Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 fwiw, both jwwssswhatever and Asszaloha are trolls whom are going to be handed their hats very soon. MAJOR 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VJ91 Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Ross Tucker opined this morning on NFL radio that the Rhodes is still part of the Bills' plans for weeks 1-3 but that was cut in view of a league rule which forces teams to pay veterans for a full year if they are on the original 53 man roster. He believes the Bills calculated that Rhodes will clear waivers and speculated that the Bills will re-sign him over the next few days. By cutting and re-signing Rhodes, rather than having him as part of the original 53 man team, the Bills will be obligated to pay Rhodes for only the weeks he is on the team rather than the full year. So let me get this straight. Rhodes won't get signed by any other team right through the end of week one. Then, he'll sign a two game contract with the Bills, play those two games, and then he'll leave again when Lynch comes back. If that's as much respect as Dominick Rhodes has left in the league, he should retire and take Ross Tucker's place on NFL Radio. I will make the bold prediction right now, Rhodes won't be available for this grand money saving scheme to work after week one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 John, I and many others (the vast majority) of this board greatly appreciate your contributions. Please do not let a few knuckle heads dissuade you from participating in TBD discussions. fwiw, both jwwssswhatever and Asszaloha are trolls whom are going to be handed their hats very soon.MAJOR 2 Agreed on all counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills-fan in arizona Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 This has been a tough week having to with posters like you, and it's made me far too cranky to deal with having to respond to this mindless banal, and plane disrespect from you and at least two other posters, jwssswhoever and Spartacus.As a result, I'm planning to take some time off this board to cool down and reconsider. I've got a busy week ahead of me, and there's no point respond to this baloney. As much as I could try to ignore it, it just rubs me the wrong way. To all those with whom I've shared many good and informed exchanges with, thank you all. It's been a pleasure. I hope to be back at some point, but at this point it all seems too trying to deal with. Sincerely, John Wawrow. Complete disrespect - I frequent this board daily and without your contributions it would be a shame. Hopefully a select few knuckleheads dont ruin your participation for the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynical Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 they did not. Vincent was placed on IR shortly into the season and then sought his release once healthy in order to sign with another team, which became the redskins. and when he sought his release from the Bills, Vincent made it clear he was not interested in coming back to Buffalo, even though he liked playing here. jw Maybe he's thinking about Nall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benderbender Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 I'm not sure too many other teams are interested in a running back on the decline with a horrible nose for running lanes and fumble on returns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deep2Moulds46 Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 When Kevin Jones went down with an injury, the Bears immediately became a player in the backup RB market. With the limited number of backup RB options in Free agency, I think the Bills ( and maybe they did, we'll never know) could have attempted to get some sort of compensation for Rhodes, even if it was only a conditional 7th like they got from the Lions for Olandis Gary in 2003. By releasing him, I think there is a possibility that they try to get him back at a non-guaranteed rate. JW is right though. For a guy like Rhodes, being cut by a team like the Bills is a slap in the face enough. I bet if he has any other option, he will look into it. I really don't understand his appeal to being here anyway. You would think he would want to be in a committe situation where he could be productive, and get a better contract next year. But, in Buffalo, he will be lucky to get 7-10 touches the first three weeks, and will be a non-factor every week after that ML and FJ are both healthy. You would think a team like Jacksonville, Chicago, St. Louis or even Cincy would be interested in his services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 I will make the bold prediction right now, Rhodes won't be available for this grand money saving scheme to work after week one. I'll take that bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 So let me get this straight. Rhodes won't get signed by any other team right through the end of week one. Then, he'll sign a two game contract with the Bills, play those two games, and then he'll leave again when Lynch comes back. If that's as much respect as Dominick Rhodes has left in the league, he should retire and take Ross Tucker's place on NFL Radio. I will make the bold prediction right now, Rhodes won't be available for this grand money saving scheme to work after week one. My thinking exactly. The first team with an injury at RB will sign Rhodes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 My thinking exactly. The first team with an injury at RB will sign Rhodes. My money would be on Jamal Lewis or Edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 fwiw, both jwwssswhatever and Asszaloha are trolls whom are going to be handed their hats very soon. Yay! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts