Playing with potential 2009 salary cap figures

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 7:00 AM EST in Opinion Comment 89 comments

Disclaimer: The following numbers that are presented here are, in essence, worst-case-scenario estimates when it comes to projecting cap space and, more importantly, the potential new contracts of key Buffalo Bills free agents. Please do not make the mistake of saving these figures as concrete; they are not. These are ballpark figures used to illustrate how difficult it's going to be for the Bills to retain key free agents, and the numbers, as is everything else we post here, are open to debate.

Now that we've begun our Potential Bills series, it's time to look at how much money we have to actually sign our new players. For 2009, the cap is projected to be approximately $123 million. As of the end of January the Bills have a projected $27 million under that cap, according to AsktheCommish.com. The official cap numbers won't be released until later in the off-season, but we'll use that number for now.

First, a little primer on the Buffalo Bills' philosophy for signing the guys in their mid to late twenties. Buffalo generally likes to pay these players earlier in their deals rather than later. This makes sense since a player's production usually tails off on the other side of 30, so the money should, too. Lee Evans, for instance, was given a contract extension last year totaling $37M. The first year salary (2008) was $11M and the second year (2009) will be $9M before becoming dropping to $5.4M and two years at $3.2M.

Jason Peters
If Jason Peters does indeed negotiate a new contract, it's not unreasonable to expect it to be larger than last year's number one pick, Jake Long. I am also expecting that Peters and his agent, Eugene Parker, will wait until after some of the top draft picks are signed (gulp - around the start of training camp) before negotiating with the Bills. This way they can use the new contracts of the drafted tackles as their starting point. Last year, Long signed a five year, $57.75 million deal with $30M guaranteed. Peters will be looking for a big increase over that, likely five years for the neighborhood of $65-70M with at least $20M of that being guaranteed money. For a franchise left tackle, that's not mind-blowing.

In the Bills' pay up front philosophy, most of that guaranteed money would likely be given up front. The amount of this lump sum could severely limit the Bills' ability to sign free agents next month. My best guess is that Buffalo gives him a front-loaded deal but without as much up front as Evans' deal; linemen tend to not tail off so quickly. Here's how it could look at the high end: five years, $70M with $36M guaranteed...

2009, $12M (first year guaranteed plus $8M signing bonus); 2010, $10M ($8M guaranteed signing bonus money); 2011, $10M ($2M roster bonus); 2012, $8M ($4M roster bonus); 2013, $8M.

When you subtract Peters' current cap hit for 2009 ($3M) you end up eating away $17M of the Bills projected $27M 2009 cap space in my fictitious scenario.

Jabari Greer
For fans of Jabari Greer, here's what it might take to re-sign him. Over the course of his career he has put up similar stats and traveled a similar road to Corey Webster of the NY Giants. In December, Webster signed a five-year, $43M contract extension with $20M guaranteed. The Giants also use front-loaded contracts, so I'll just copy and paste how Webster's contract breaks down and use that to guesstimate Greer's potential deal...

2009: $1 million (+ guaranteed $8 million roster bonus), 2010: $2.75 million (+ guaranteed $4 million roster bonus), 2011: $7.25 million, 2012: $7 million, 2013: $7.5 million.

Since Greer will be a free agent, his full cap hit is the first year number ($9M), though I would suspect less money in the first year and more in the second for Greer because if they are re-signing him, it's to eventually replace Terrence McGee. McGee will be a UFA after the 2009 season.

Angelo Crowell
Many Rumblers are of the opinion that Crowell could return this year and at a neat little "hometown discount". Don't count on it. To give you a feel for what Crowell might cost, even with the I-had-knee-surgery-and-can't-get-a-better-deal discount, I'll show you Cato June's contract from a few years ago. June signed a three year, $12M contract with a $2M signing bonus. In the year preceding that deal, he had 96 solo tackles, a sack, 2 FF, 1 FR, and 3 INT. Crowell, in his last healthy year, had 86 solo tackles, 2 sacks, 1 FF, 1 FR, 1 INT and a safety; I'd call those stat lines pretty similar. Assume that any raise he would have received is gone because of the knee. I can see Crowell going for $4-5M a year, inflated slightly over June's contract from two years ago. If the Bills' coaches and front office executives are over the surgery thing, they might have to bring him back for a four year, $15M deal with heavy incentives for performance that could boost it to $20M.

Cutting from our cap
In order to save some money on the cap, there have been suggestions on who to get rid of. Kurupt helpfully offered this list last week: Chris Kelsay ($3M), Roscoe Parrish ($3M), Robert Royal ($1.5M), and John McCargo ($800k). I'll add Ko "Millions" Simpson ($500k) to the list, too, for a savings of about $9M on the 2009 salary cap.

Draft Picks
We also need to remember to set aside an arbitrary amount for the rookie salaries. Last year the Bills had a little over $5 million on their "rookie draft cap" so we'll call it $5.5M this year. Again, that's just an estimation.

Results
With the cuts mentioned above, the Bills would have $36M to spend on free agents and re-signings. The three re-signings would fill some holes, but at what cost? The total salaries for these three guys could be $133M! The cap hit for 2009 alone would be over the $27M initial cap mark at $30M. Plus, that's before bringing in any free agents. If you cut the above-mentioned players from our cap, it saves us $9M, bringing the difference to $6M of available cap space. Subtract the rookie pool and you have about enough money to keep Ko Simpson under the cap (not that I'm advocating it). Signing these three guys would be your entire off-season.

I'm trying to say that for all the guys who want Greer and Crowell back while signing Peters to his extension and bringing in new talent (not to mention extending important guys like Fred Jackson, Keith Ellison, Kirk Chambers, John DiGiorgio, George Wilson, and Gibran Hamdan), it's not going to happen with the cap. Now the numbers I am using are my best guess to all of this so there are obviously ways to make it happen that involve fine-tuning Peters or the other two contracts.

My expectation is they re-sign Peters to a monster deal. It's better than drafting an unknown OT who could turn into a bust (Mike Williams comes to mind), but it's a little more expensive. They let Crowell walk unless he gives them a mega-discount to about $3-3.5M a year. They choose between McGee and Greer and McGee wins. Greer just hasn't done enough to unseat him.

3 recs | Comment 89 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Here’s how it could look at the high end: five years, $70M with $36M guaranteed…

Good… Lord… Peters might get that type of deal in 2020. Right now, not even Ben Roethlisberger ($33M guaranteed) got $36M guaranteed. That’s way too hyperbolic a contract figure for me.

I’d price these guys more in the neighborhood of…

Peters – five years, $40-45 million, $20 million guaranteed
Greer – five years, $24 million, $8 million guaranteed
Crowell – four years, $16 million, $5 million guaranteed (similar to what you have)

Greer isn’t getting a Corey Webster-type deal, I don’t think. I’d ballpark him as an inflated McGee deal. Crowell you’re fine, I think, but the Peters numbers you put out there are borderline ridiculous.

The point you’re trying to make – re-signing all three is practically impossible – is valid. But we’d have much more than $500K (your figure) to spend if we did, indeed, sign all three of these guys plus our rookies.

Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more

by Brian Galliford on Feb 8, 2009 8:58 AM EST reply actions 1 recs

Jake Long got 30M guaranteed.

Granted I don’t think the Bills are all about guaranteed money but when I say that I basically give him the signing bonus and the first year’s salary guaranteed.

12M salary plus 8M bonus is 20 right off the bat. Plus another 8M on year 2 as a "signing bonus is 28. I guess that’s probably a better guaranteed figure is 28M or 30M.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 9:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Jake Long was the #1 overall draft pick. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – the balance of Long’s contract and the contract of Tennessee’s Michael Roos is where Parker will aim.

Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more

by Brian Galliford on Feb 8, 2009 9:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I hope that's where they aim...

I think this or something like it will be their first offer. It will go back and forth, hopefully.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 4:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with Brian's assessment MRW

Plus, I know the Bills have a habit of front loading contracts but in the case of Peters who is young and will likely be playing well into his thirties I think they will make an exception and give him a back loaded contract to allow us to sign free agents now. After starting 5-1 and with Jauron in make the playoffs now mentality I bet Peters gets a backloaded contract to try and get us over the hump in 2009.

Kawika Mitchell is a leader. He will help this young team develop.

by poz on Feb 8, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Honestly, with regards to Peters:

I’ve been thinking the same thing – about him most likely waiting until draftees and free agents have signed deals, but feel that if he/his agent pull that stunt again, they have less bargaining room. Why? Because if it’s up in the air with him until that point, will the team not have addressed their free agent needs? Won’t much of that money be used up? Would they let free agent opportunity go because they need to “hold” money and hope out for good ole Jason?

I hope both sides take the high road, but honestly, if they hold out for values coming off the draft and FA period, i’m of the mindset that they need to cater to the Bills.

I know that the Bills could have addressed this situation during the season, but they don’t ever seem to see things that way.

"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"

"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"

by TheAfghanTwilight on Feb 8, 2009 9:00 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Good Work Matt

Although you have depressed the hell out of me :-) If AZ can be in a position to win the SB with Mike Gandy as a LT, is Peters really worth a mega deal? Didn’t the Steelers let one of their O-line walk rather than pay them the big money? What are they paying for their LT? If you can’t tell, your piece has all but convinced me that Peters will not get that mega deal from the Bills. If that is what he wants, trade him for 2 first rounders plus whatever else you can get. We have Chambers who stepped in and played very well at the beginning of the season. Find a new Center and our line will still be very good.

Teach your children about the four seasons: preseason, regular season, postseason, and off-season

by Joe P. on Feb 8, 2009 9:02 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Steelers let Faneca go.

But they will be the first to admit their O Line was terrible this year and by the grace of Ben did they have any offense. His ability to escape let them make up the difference.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 9:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

FYI

They can’t resign Ko Simpson, he’s worth millions.

"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"

"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"

by TheAfghanTwilight on Feb 8, 2009 9:05 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Peters and up front money

I wouldn’t at all be surprised if Buffalo blanches at giving Peters a huge pile of cash up front. He has amply demonstrated that he can’t be trusted to hold up his end of the bargin. Good luck getting that bonus money back once Peters has it in his bank account.

I’m a proponent of guaranteed contracts generally and in Peters’ case in particular. Fine, give him $70 million over 5 or 6 years, but do it on a (guaranteed) annual basis instead of a big pile of cash up front, a big pile of cash that will be forgotten entirely (by Peters) about 3 years after he receives it and other LTs are making more than he is. At least that way if Peters throws a(nother) fit Buffalo won’t be screwed at LT AND out of $30 million that could have been used on other players.

by Ron From NM on Feb 8, 2009 11:05 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

What I think Buffalo needs to do is back load Peters’ contract where he gets very small salaries for the first couple of years of the deal and then big unguaranteed numbers near the backend. That is the way most big contracts are handed out and that way Peters can’t complain when his salary is up over 10 mil a season for the last few years of his deal. Most big contracts barely pay any money in yearly salary for a season or two because the player just cashed in huge with a signing bonus, so Peters would certainly be happy there. And then Peters would have to bust his ass making sure he doesn’t get cut like so many players do with 10-12 mil in unguaranteed salary available during the last couple years of the deal. It’s a tried and true method, why mess with what works.

by kaisertown on Feb 8, 2009 11:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Isn’t that just the sort of contract that players have become wary of? Knowing they’re going to get cut, traded or restructured after 3-4 years on a 6-8 year deal is the reason they want the huge pile of money up front. I think teams are starting to realize that handing over that money right away is not in their best interest—think Michael Vick.

by Ron From NM on Feb 8, 2009 11:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Backloaded contracts aren't generally how the Bills do their contracts.

They want to avoid overpaying someone for diminishing skills (see Kelsay, Chris). Look at Evans contract and see how that is laid out.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 1:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, they’d much rather pay right up front for diminishing skills (see Kelsay, Chris).

by Ron From NM on Feb 8, 2009 1:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually, the Bills generally always do backloaded contracts. They pay signing bonuses upfront with very small yearly salaries at first and then they jump up halfway through the contract. Kelsay is actually a good example of that. The Bills paid/owe him these unguaranteed salaries:

2007 – 1.0
2008 – 1.4
2009 – 3.0
2010 – 3.7

They gave him 8 mil upfront, but if you consider giving players a signing bonus as front loading a contract, then every NFL contract since 1990 is a frontloaded contract. This is what teams do, they give the guaranteed money upfront, which gets spread over the contract via the cap, but is given in one or two large sums early in the deal in reality. The salaries rise every year which is advantageous to the team because those salaries are not guaranteed and you can cut a guy whenever and save that money. You avoid overpaying for diminshing skills by giving out backloaded contracts; otherwise, you give a guy a ton of money and then if he sucks later then oh, well you already paid him and you don’t save any money by cutting him.

Like I mentioned in my post down below, Evans is a special example because he didn’t receive a signing bonus, the Bills have the cap space now and they didn’t want to waste it down the road so instead of giving him a signing bonus upfront that gets spread out in the cap, they gave him two huge salaries to start the contract and make up for the lack of a signing bonus.

Take a look at Aaron Schobel’s contract, Derrick Dockery’s, Langston Walker’s or any player other than Evans who the Bills have signed recently and you will see the yearly salaries go up every year.

by kaisertown on Feb 8, 2009 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You keep using salary numbers without bonus money

Is bonus money any worse than salary money?? Does it come off the cap differently or spend differently? No.

Kelsay got an 8M signing bonus (his is pro-rated over the course of the deal, though) and a 3M roster bonus in year one. You say he made 1.0M in year one but if you tack on the 3M roster bonus he got essentially by signing it’s 4M the first year.

The salaries you mentioned go up every year. Schobel’s goes up 2M in the last year alone to 8M or so but both sides knew that was not going to happen. It was a throwaway year.

Langston Walker’s salary is front-loaded: He made 5M in bonuses his first year plus his salary, this year he made 2M. In the last three years of his deal his salary stays 3M.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

For starters, Peters’ first year cap hit with the contract you pointed out would actually be around 15 mil because signing bonuses are spread evenly throughout the length of the contract. And Peters’ current cap hit is actually up around 4 mil because his 09 salary is 3 mil plus his signing bonus hit. So the new contract you propose would bump the Bills current cap total up about 11 mil. This contract would cost Buffalo 3.2 mil (16 mil signing bonus / 5 years) every year against the cap in addition to whatever his yearly salary is. That is where the concept of dead money comes from, signing bonus money always counts against the cap evenly regardless of whether the player is traded, released, retires or even dies. For example, Green Bay still has Brett Favre’s signing bonus on their salary cap, but the Jets can cut him tommorrow and he will be completely off their salary cap. It is the main reason why the salary cap is a stupid way to figure out how much money teams can spend during the offseason.

I don’t think the Evans deal is all that front loaded when you consider that he didn’t get a signing bonus. Say Buffalo would have given him that 37.5 mil deal with 10 mil being a signing bonus instead and assume that Buffalo would’ve given him 5 mil in bonus money upfront and the other 5 mil heading into the 09 season. His yearly salaries (if you include roster bonuses)would be 6 mil, 4 mil, 8.4 mil, 4 mil, 4 mil. If you are going to include signing bonus money into the contract, then every team frontloads contracts. You can easily point out Aaron Schobel as a very backloaded contract that Buffalo has given out.

It’s one thing to say that Peters’ contract could compete or exceed Jake Long’s, but it is an entirely different story to think that Peters could get 2.5 mil more per year than Long did. I’m sorry, but 5 years, 70 mil is an outrageously high contract. Quarterbacks don’t get those kind of huge deals. 14 mil a year for a LT would be unprecedented to say the least. Here is the list of the biggest OT contracts handed out (in no particular order):

Jake Long – 5 years – 57.5 mil
Joe Thomas – 5 years – 42.5 mil
Walter Jones – 7 year – 52.5 mil
Michael Roos – 6 year – 53 mil
Leonard Davis – 7 years – 49.5 mil (Dallas moved him, but he was an OT at the time)
Orlando Pace – 7 years – 52.5 mil
Bryant McKinnie – 7 years – 48.5 mil
Flozell Adams – 6 years – 43.8 mil

So you can see that 5 years, 70 mil would blow any previous OT deal out of the water. Let’s also not forget that Jake Long got that deal by being the first overall pick where he had most of the leverage when negotiating with Miami. Peters is still under contract for two more seasons and the Bills have a lot of leverage on him. They can easily play hardball with Peters when negotiating with him and start with low ball offers until Peters is forced to take a contract closer to Roos’ than to Long’s. I think when it is all said and done, Peters will make about 9 – 10 mil a year and everbody is happy. I’ll guess 6 years for 55.5 mil with around 10-14 in immediate signing bonus money and some nice roster bonuses and other guarantees that push the guaranteed money up over 20 mil.

How is Corey Webster’s contract front loaded? It looks pretty even to me. And I agree with Brian that 8 mil is way more than Greer will get. I’ve been guessing 6 mil a year all along and I am going to stick with that guess.

Cato June didn’t miss an entire season and was one of a couple good linebackers available. Crowell’s situation is totally different, although 4 mil a year for Crowell probably isn’t too high. I bet he gets a 2 year, 6 mil deal with some incentives that push the contract up around 4 a year with good performance.

by kaisertown on Feb 8, 2009 11:42 AM EST reply actions 6 recs

nice job kaiser

rec’d

Maybe now you'll never slime a guy with a positron collider

by J2 on Feb 8, 2009 12:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

My bad, I mistyped Roos’ contract. It is actually only 6 years, 43 mil

by kaisertown on Feb 8, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not all signing bonuses are spread evenly through the years.

That is what I laid it out the way I did. You don’t need to pro-rate signing bonuses over the length of the contract. A couple of years ago they gave Dockery half his signing bonus up front. What’s to say they won’t do it for Peters?

The cap hit for pro-rated signing bonuses for someone who is traded or released is applied to the next year salary cap. The Packers won’t have any Favre money on their cap next year because it was applied to their 2008 cap.

The Bills didn’t give Lee Evans a signing bonus… OK great. The first two years of his contract are by far the biggest salaries so he is getting his money up front. Call it whatever you want.

The contract I laid out for Peters is what he might want. I never said the Bills would/should offer him that.

Corey Webster earns 9M in the first year between his measley 1M salary and his guaranteed 8M roster bonus. Then he makes at or around 7M the rest of the years. That’s how it’s front loaded.

So you’re saying that even though Cato June signed his contract two years ago and had the same stats as Crowell, he will be earning a million dollars less a year. Of all the numbers I put up there, I am most confident that Crowell’s numbers will end up being close.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 1:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Let’s get some things straight.

You are right that if you either trade or release a player that you have to deal with all of the cap hits during the following year. I’m not sure what I was thinking saying that Favre was still on the Packers’ books.

The salary cap does pro-rate signing bonuses evenly throughout the length of the contract. To my knowledge there is no way around it other than not giving out big signing bonuses. Can you give an example of someone getting a signing bonus that isn’t spread evenly throughout the deal in the salary cap numbers? Or a link to an article that says that you can spread the cap hit of a signing bonus out sporadically? Teams rarely pay signing bonus money all spread out like the cap makes it look, but that is the way the NFL operates.

The Bills didn’t give Lee Evans a signing bonus… OK great. The first two years of his contract are by far the biggest salaries so he is getting his money up front. Call it whatever you want.

Exactly, his first two years are the biggest because he didn’t get a signing bonus. His signing bonus is essentially included in the first two years and Evans doesn’t have a problem with that because he knows Buffalo isn’t going to cut him during those years so the money is essentially guaranteed. I believe that everything is relative. Nothing is black and white and everything needs to be compared to something to have a good understanding of where it stands. Saying that a contract like Corey Websters or a deal where the salary goes up every year, but the biggest pay year is the first season because of the signing bonus is a frontloaded contract doesn’t make sense to me, because if those aren’t front loaded deals, then what is a back loaded deal? If you include the signing bonus, which NFL player actually makes more money the last two years of his deal then he does the first two years of the contract? You simply won’t find any NFL player has a backloaded contract if you put guaranteed money into the equation. All that should matter is unguaranteed money. Players are going to get their guaranteed money no matter what, that is what makes it guaranteed. We should only consider unguaranteed money like yearly salaries when discussing whether contracts are front loaded, evenly spread or back loaded.

by kaisertown on Feb 8, 2009 6:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Pro-rates signing bonuses

Look at two of the Bills free agent contracts from two years ago:

Walker got half his signing bonus immediately

3/2/2007: Signed a five-year, $25 million contract. The deal included a $10 million signing bonus, $5 million of which was paid out immediately. 2008: $2 million, 2009-2011: $3 million, 2012: Free Agent

Dockery got half his signing bonus immediately

3/2/2007: Signed a seven-year, $49 million contract. The deal contains $18.5 million guaranteed, including a $16 million signing bonus. $8.1 million of the signing bonus was paid immediately. 2009: $2.75 million, 2010: $4.5 million, 2011: $5.65 million, 2012: $6.575 million, 2013: $6.775 million, 2014: Free Agent

The Bills have done it before. The remaining money is pro-rated. Rotoworld.com

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 9, 2009 9:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I know you don’t have to pay signing bonus money upfront or prorate it throughout the contract, but the player’s salary cap figure always spread signing bonus money evenly throughout the contract. That is just how the salary cap works. Say you give Jason Peters a 5 year contract with a 15 mil signing bonus, that bonus will count 3 mil against the cap every year regardless of when and how the Bills pay it.

by kaisertown on Feb 9, 2009 2:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So if they give Langston walker 5 mil up front they still pro rate that money?

It doesn’t make sense.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 9, 2009 3:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That is the way it works. It’s to try and help teams during the offseason so that resigning one of your best players doesn’t put you into immediate cap problems. Most teams essentially ignore teh salary cap now just like Buffalo does. The Bills don’t care how much cap space they have, they care about how much money they have to pay in 09 salary and whatever the estimate is on 09 performance bonuses and decide how many real dollars they have to spend this offseason and that is the number they will actually spend. The salary cap is growing more and more irrelevant every year just like Ralph Wilson said it would.

by kaisertown on Feb 9, 2009 5:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree that it's becoming irrelevant...

but what’s the point of specifically staing that a person is getting 5M of the signing bonus immediately if it’s still prorated?

I’ll have to send an email to Timmy Graham to see if he can explain it.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 9, 2009 8:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Rotoworld says he is getting the money because that is when the team is actually paying it. When someone gets the money and when it counts against the cap are two different things. In real life, players get the money in one lump sum or in a couple payments soon after signing the contract. But the salary cap spreads the signing bonus out evenly throughout the length of the contract. That is what people mean when they say a team has a cap hit for releasing a player under contract. Teams don’t actually lose real dollars when they cut someone, they are just left with cap space that is still taken up by the released player.

by kaisertown on Feb 9, 2009 10:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Backloaded vs. frontloaded

You’re arguing against yourself on this.

If you include the signing bonus, which NFL player actually makes more money the last two years of his deal then he does the first two years of the contract? You simply won’t find any NFL player has a backloaded contract if you put guaranteed money into the equation.

Notice Webster’s deal has that lovely 8M front-loaded roster bonus not a pro-rated signing bonus. He makes by far more money in year one than any year thereafter.

Your guaranteed money point is vaild. You’re saying that because the last few years are unguaranteed every contract is feasibly a lower year since you can cut that player. The guaranteed money is usually up front in the first few years of a contract so you could say that it’s front loaded. I get that and it’s a pretty good point.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 9, 2009 9:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Re-read that quote of mine. I am saying that if you are going to count signing bonus money as first year salary then you can’t find a contract that pays more at the end then it does in the beginning. If Corey Webster’s contract is considered a front loaded deal, then no NFL player has signed a decent sized back loaded contract since the mid-nineties.

by kaisertown on Feb 9, 2009 2:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

an $8M roster bonus up front is front-loading.

it’s not pro-rated. It’s not a signing bonus. THe biggest year of the deal by far is the first. The contracts from the mid-90s you are referencing are spread throughout the contract.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 9, 2009 3:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It is a roster bonus because teams are getting smart and avoiding signing bonuses because they want to take the cap hit up front and avoid signing bonus money from taking up cap space down the road. A roster bonus in the first year of the contract is essentially a guaranteed signing bonus because NY obviously isn’t going to cut Webster immediately after giving him the new contract. It’s exactly like what Buffalo did with Evans, they gave him a huge first year salary midseason because they had the cap space free so you might as well use it now and save some for down the road. It is pathetic how easy it is to manipulate to salary cap, like I said up top the cap is becoming more irrelevant every year. If you can find the list of what teams 08 cap numbers were vs. what they paid in actual salary, it is pretty absurd how little they match up.

Teams typically pay signing bonus money early in the contract if they don’t pay it all up front. That is why they call it a signing bonus and not just guaranteed salary.

by kaisertown on Feb 9, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

right but not every team is doing that like you said before.

Big Ben: 2008: 2.5 million, 2009: $4.75 million (+ $3 million roster bonus due in March), 2010: $8.05 million, 2011-2014: $11.6 million, 2015: $12.1 million

Why does his jump up so high at the end?

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 9, 2009 8:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well the Steelers also gave Roethlisberger a 25 million dollar check when he signed that contract. USA Today’s website shows what the players recieved in past years in great detail and maybe this will help make sense of everything.

So on the site, you can see that Ben’s salary this year was a measly 2.5 mil, but he recieved 25 mil in signing bonus money so he actually got over 27 mil (coincidentally making him the highest paid player in the league this year if you count bonuses). But Roethlisberger still only counted against the cap for about 8 mil. So that 8 mil figure comes from this past year’s salary, over 3 mil from his signing bonus (thats 25 mil divided by his 8 years under contract) and the last two years worth of signing bonus money (about 2.7 mil) from from his rookie contract. He signed a 6 year deal after being drafted in 2004 with about 8 mil in signing bonus money that was paid up front, but the cap spreads that out to 1.35ish per year from 2004-2009, so just like if you release a player you have to cover all the remaining signing bonus money the season after you release or resign them. So just to be clear Roethlisberger’s 2008 season 8 mil cap number comes from:

2.50 mil 2008 salary
3.15 mil which is 1/8 of the signing bonus from his 8 year contract extension
2.7 mil which is money that had already been paid, but hadn’t yet counted against the steelers cap from his rookie deal.
You then add all the potential performance bonuses for 2008 to the total and subtract all the 2007 performance bonuses that he didn’t acheive and you have Big Ben’s 2008 cap number.

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/playerdetail.aspx?lname=roethlisberger&player=3519

Does that make any sense at all?

by kaisertown on Feb 9, 2009 10:32 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Good stuff Kaiser

~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"

by Kurupt on Feb 10, 2009 12:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That makes perfect sense.

I used the usatoday stats to compile the Bang for the Buck stuff. I just thought that when a team gave a player 8M up front the salary cap hit was then. Weird.

If it’s a roster bonus (see Webster’s deal) it’s not pro-rated, though. Right?

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 10, 2009 10:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Roster bonuses aren’t pro-rated. That is why we keep seeing all these weird deals with no signing bonus money like Webster and Evans. Teams are trying to save the salary cap space for later.

by kaisertown on Feb 10, 2009 11:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ok...

I thought that if they gave them half the money “paid out immediately” like Walker and Dockery that they were essentially doing that. Interesting note.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 10, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And I forgot to mention that we are pretty close on the dollar figure for Crowell. I was just pointing out how their situations aren’t at all similiar. June only had a handful of good FA linebackers to compete with while Crowell has 3 times that. Crowell’s injury is a huge factor that can’t be overlooked. June’s contract was signed a few years ago and things change in the NFL very quickly. I just don’t think the two are comparable players nor are they in comparable situations.

by kaisertown on Feb 8, 2009 6:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So even if we don't agree on the particulars, the end result is the same

Fair enough.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 9, 2009 9:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

as usual kaiser

rational and well thought out points

Kawika Mitchell is a leader. He will help this young team develop.

by poz on Feb 8, 2009 5:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Rec'd

6 years and $70 million works out to a bit over $11 million a year, right around the Long deal.

by Ron From NM on Feb 8, 2009 11:50 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

and probably still too high for Peters….Long got the money as the #1 pick, more than anything.

Kaiser did a great job showing that Long is the only one making an average of $10+M per season. Only two others average over $8M per season, Roos and Thomas. I really think the Roos deal should be guide for both sides….

~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"

by Kurupt on Feb 8, 2009 12:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sounds fair to me

But will it sound fair to the guys (Parker, Peters) walking around with dollar signs in their eyes?

by Ron From NM on Feb 8, 2009 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So you think he'll be content not being the highest paid tackle?

I don’t. He held out without saying a word. He feels like the Bills owe it to him now. He will go in with the goal of being the highest paid lineman in history.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 1:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The Bills still have all the leverage with Peters. The Bills can dump a 12-14 mil signing bonus in Peters’ lap and that should be all the dollars that he needs.

by kaisertown on Feb 8, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So you think we should play hard ball for the next two years

then let him walk and get nothing? I am sure Peters will love that! No chance he will be a disruption.

Teach your children about the four seasons: preseason, regular season, postseason, and off-season

by Joe P. on Feb 8, 2009 5:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If it wil cost the Bills 70 mil over 5 years to resign Peters, then yes play hard ball to the absolute extreme. Fortunately, I don’t think that will be the case. I think my guess of 6 years 55.5 mil is a pretty good deal for Peters and something that both sides can be happy with. All I am saying is that Buffalo has the leverage in this scenario and they should use it to get a contract that they can work around. Peters should be happy with a contract that makes him the highest paid offensive lineman in the league who wasn’t the first overall pick. If 9+ mil a year isn’t enough then I will absolutely hope Buffalo either plays hardball or trades the guy. I am not willing to give Peters 14 mil a year. That is ridiculous.

by kaisertown on Feb 8, 2009 6:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Whoa whoa whoa

that’s a bit overboard, IMO Matt.

$14M per season for Peters? Yeah, that ain’t happening. $8-10M per tops. If he thinks he is going to get a 5 yr $70M deal, he can stick it.

6 year $50M, with $20-$24M guaranteed is a very good deal for him.

Anybody who offers Greer that type of money should be shot! He’s never started a full season, offers nothing in run support and really isn’t that special of a cover corner. Has he surprised here? Yes. Has he been a decent playmaker? Yes. Has he been overmatched at times? Yes. $4-5M per season is all Greer is worth, and if a team gives him more than that, good luck to them. He isn’t the same type of player as Webster, nor should he get paid like that. Webster’s deal was also kind of ridiculous.

And honestly, I don’t understand why anyone believes Crowell will get $4-5M per season. He’s a slightly above average LB who’s coming off a major knee problem. He hasn’t played in a year and has to prove himself again. Remember, Kawika Mitchell got around $3.5M per season from us last year, a year in which he played very well for the SB champ Giants. Crowell is coming off a non-season and a major knee surgery. I’d laugh if someone gave him $4-5M per season simply because you sign guys like him to 1-2 year deals and tell him to prove it before you give him big money. I just can’t fathom any team doing this. LB’s haven’t been getting big money, and injured ones definitely don’t. Plus, the Bills aren’t bringing Crowell back, I think Brian is more than right about that.

Those numbers weren’t from me, I don’t recall. Another Rumbler has posted them somewhere, so if you are able to find that reply, you should give them the credit!!!

BTW, a guy at Billszone.com forums puts together a great Salary Cap update page every year. He says he’s working on it currently, so it should be done soon. He’s usually right on the money.

~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"

by Kurupt on Feb 8, 2009 12:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I found the numbers... you gave the players to cut.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 1:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

K, you are going to have to come to terms with the fact

Peters is going to want to get top dollar. Why do so many people want to argue how great a player he is until it comes time to pay him? Then, all of a sudden people want to pay him like he is a slightly above average LT. So what if Jake Long was a #1 pick. He got that money without ever playing a down in the NFL. Which is worth more? Peters is a proven ProBowl LT, entering his prime, best years ahead of him, right?

Teach your children about the four seasons: preseason, regular season, postseason, and off-season

by Joe P. on Feb 8, 2009 5:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Doesn’t paying him nearly as much as Long mean he’s the 2nd highest paid LT? I agree paying him, but that 11.5M per year, compared to the rest of the top LT’s, is somewhat ridiculous.

~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"

by Kurupt on Feb 8, 2009 8:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Why do so many people want to argue how great a player he is until it comes time to pay him? Then, all of a sudden people want to pay him like he is a slightly above average LT.

1) Second highest contract of all LTs doesn’t sound like the pay of a slightly above average LT to me; to me it sounds like a top tier LT.
2) I think there’s ample evidence that he is not the best LT in the league, and therefore should not be paid like one. He is a young top tier LT, and should be paid as such.

by Hopefulcynic on Feb 9, 2009 1:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Go back and read what Matt wrote, I am not going to restate it.

I agree with your assessment of what Peters should be paid, but I doubt Peters will.

Teach your children about the four seasons: preseason, regular season, postseason, and off-season

by Joe P. on Feb 9, 2009 9:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The issue with Greer is this K

There are maybe 3 better CBs out on the market currently for FA, Leigh Bodden, Dunta Robinson and Pacman Jones. Nandi is going to resign with the Raiders because Al Davis is crazy and will pay him so much money it will make the Clements deal look wimpy. McFadden would be a better choice, but he will resign with Pittsburgh.

Dunta and Leigh would be worth that much, but Greer will get it because teams are always desperate for CBs with some proven success. For a listing of current FAs but not updated in the past 2 weeks is here at KFFL

I told the witch doctor that I was in love with the Buffalo Bills, and instead of telling me to say "Oh eeh oh oh ah, ting tang walla walla wing bang" in order to make me feel better he told me to buy a gun and end it.

by WABillsfan on Feb 8, 2009 6:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

But he’s been a semi-starter for parts of the last 2 years. Is that really proving himself?

~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"

by Kurupt on Feb 8, 2009 8:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Rob Johnson and Matt Schaub got more with less...

by krytime on Feb 8, 2009 8:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Johnson and Schaub are quarterbacks. Totally different. QBs are so much more important and highly sought after that you can’t really compare them to a Jabari Greer type situation.

by kaisertown on Feb 8, 2009 10:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That was a freebie...

I was waiting to see how long it would take for someone to say what you just did. But, there is a point to it – some guys will get money even though they didn’t play much….

by krytime on Feb 9, 2009 12:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I’m trying to think of some non-QB’s….Michael Turner I guess, but he showed plenty of big time ability just without the opportunity….

~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"

by Kurupt on Feb 9, 2009 12:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah usually non-QBs are signed to "prove it" deals.

one or two years, potentially incentive laden. See Panda last year. He wasn’t able to prove it and will be hurt by it now.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 9, 2009 9:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Offseason Actoins Consider this Post

1st Priority: Jason Peters
2nd Priority: 1st round draft pick
3rd Priority: 2nd round draft pick
4th Priority: Angelo Crowell
5th Priority: Jabari Greer
6th Priority: Kelsay, Parrish, Royal, McCargo, Simpson

So, after reading the article, this is what I think the Bills should do:

1. Re-sign Jason Peters,
2. Cut Kelsay, Parrish, Royal, McCargo, and Simpson
3. Don’t sign Crowell
4. Let Greer go (we have McGee and McKelvin)

And the Draft would look something like this:

Round 1: Defensive End to replace Kelsay. (Brown, Maybin, Johnson, Orakpo)
Round 2: Outside Linebacker to replace Crowell. (Tyrone McKenzie)
Round 3. Defensive Tackle to replace McCargo. (Jarron Gilbert)
Round 4. Corner back to replace Greer. (Joe Burnett)
Round 5. Safety to replace Simpson. (Otis Wiley)
Round 6. QB to replace JP. (Rudy Carpenter)
Round 7. WR to replace Roscoe. (Sammie Stroughter or Nate Swift)

You can consider this my mock draft!

Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.

- Plato

by buffaloboy90 on Feb 8, 2009 12:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I’m curious as to why you completely ignore the C position. Is running up the gut not all that iimportant after all? I see that Chambers isn’t in your plans at all either, nor do you plan to replace him in the draft when he walks. For that matter, you don’t even mention slugs like Preston and Fowler—guys who belong in the ’Don’t sign’ category. Who do you see playing C? Who is the reserve OT?

Why cut guys like Parrish who are paid for and at least contribute on special teams? Why completely ignore the offense—you know, the unit that caused Buffalo to lose several games last season—in the first 5 rounds of the draft? Why take a corner in round 4 when Buffalo has McKelvin, McGee, Youboty and Corner? Why take a LB in the 2nd when there are quite a few FA LBs available?

by Ron From NM on Feb 8, 2009 1:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well BB90...

we don’t have a center on the roster. We need to sign or draft at least two.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 1:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Reply to Ron from NM

why you completely ignore the C position

I think the Bills should stick with Duke Preston.

Chambers isn’t in your plans at all either

I forgot about Chambers. The Bills should re-sign him. He played pretty well for us in his limited role in my opinion. Swing tackles are very necessary.

Why cut guys like Parrish who are paid for and at least contribute on special teams?

In my opinion, all Parrish really contributes to is special teams and thus does not deserve 3 million dollars a year. I think if we got rid of him and had McKelvin and Terrence return kicks and punts no one would notice the difference. Also, Joe Burnett (the CB is said to take in round 4 is a really good returner.

Why completely ignore the offense

Well, the guys that this article said we were letting go were almost all defensive guys. Thus, we need to fill those spots. I don’t COMPLETELY ignore offense, I think we should draft a backup QB and a receiver in rounds 6 and 7. The QB should be Stephen McGee, not Rudy Carpenter. I feel the talent pool at the WR and TE position in this year’s draft are pretty weak. Thus is we drafted a WR or a TE early it would be a reach. Just my opinion.

Why take a corner in round 4 when Buffalo has McKelvin, McGee, Youboty and Corner?

First we are losing Jabari Greer, so that spot needs to be filled. Second, Joe Burnett also takes up Roscoe Parrish’s spot as a punt returner (although I think McKelvin might assume the role anyway).

Why take a LB in the 2nd when there are quite a few FA LBs available?

First, I’m assuming we let Crowell walk. This article said, the Bills are kind of short on money and can’t sign any blockbuster free agents. I feel Bart Scott and LeRoy Hill will demand really big contracts so I don’t want any part of them. Tyrone McKenzie is a first round talent. You should check him out on Youtube. He could definitely start. Also, I think Alvin Bowen could play the OLB role for us if he’s healthy.

Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.

- Plato

by buffaloboy90 on Feb 8, 2009 2:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The Bills aren't short on money by any means.

The Bills can be short on money if they sign these guys to three huge contracts. The point of this article is to give a worst-case if we re-sign all these guys. I was seeing too much wheelin’ and dealin’ and diced to look at how it might shake out with the salary cap. We could easily let these guys walk (except Peters who is under contract) and sign some big name F/A if we want.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Still short

That still leaves a few needs that are not addressed and proberly more since Gilbert, Burnett, Wiley, Swift or Stroughter if they make the roster will still need a year or two to develop ( exception may be Gilbert) IMO and we still need a C and TE and more importantly we will lose experience… That said, I do agree we could trade or release Royal,Kelsey Mccargo (provided he can pass a physical) Greer and Crowell (if they both request to much). But , this will depend on FA first then the draft. 3-5 weeks from now will dictate what path we must go.
Simpson at his cost and it isn’t millions is still an Asset

by tomsbills on Feb 8, 2009 1:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Reply to tomsbills

Haha yes McCargo definitely needs to pass a physical at some point!

In my opinion, the Center and Tight end spots do not need to be filled. However, that is a totally different debate. I think the Bills should just stick with Duke Preston and Derek Fine. And since we get rid of royal we could just have a random tight end by our 3rd (if we even need a third).

Well this article said getting rid of Ko would save money, so I think its ok to get rid of him. Bryan Scott will start at SS next year anyway and Donte at FS. We could draft Otis Wiley in the 5th for less money than Simpson.

Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.

- Plato

by buffaloboy90 on Feb 8, 2009 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Crazy money all around..........just thinking about all this cash floating around and me not getting any of it makes my head hurt

12/19/08 - Thank you KLJ for coming into my life.

by norcaliangelsfan on Feb 8, 2009 1:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Reply to norcalianangelsfan

All these guys will be broke 2 or 3 years after they stop playing if it’s any consolation.

Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.

- Plato

by buffaloboy90 on Feb 8, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

lol........too funny

12/19/08 - Thank you KLJ for coming into my life.

by norcaliangelsfan on Feb 8, 2009 3:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

LOL

Funny how Faneca went to the Jets and they stunk and Pittsburgh won it all. Things aren’t always brighter on the other side. What a greedy guy! Look where it got him! The same place you and I were on Super Bowl Sunday, right in front of the television!

The time to deliver is now and if you fail to do so you will no doubt witness the consequences first hand.

by Cutter3636 on Feb 8, 2009 1:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Off Season..................

It makes sense to sign Birk for a year or two at the most. This being said, I don’t think the Bills will get him. Other teams will be offering more money.

Peters = 5yrs. – 50 mill
Greer= 5yrs. – 27mill
Crowell= GOODBYE
McGee= GOODBYE (UFA next season and Greer is BETTER)
Whitner= GOODBYE (You cost WAY TOO MUCH MONEY and we can easily replace you)
Royal= GOODBYE
Kelsay= GOODBYE
Simpson= GOODBYE

This needs to happen but it won’t. Mark my words, unless miracles take place, the Bills won’t make the playoffs next year and Juaron is gone. (Should have already happened)

The time to deliver is now and if you fail to do so you will no doubt witness the consequences first hand.

by Cutter3636 on Feb 8, 2009 1:47 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

They won't jettison Whitner yet so I didn't even include his numbers...

His cap hit jumps considerably next year from this past year’s $450k.
Whitner’s salary 2009: $2.355 million, 2010: $2.445 million, 2011: $1.95075 million

We could save another 2M+ just by getting rid of him. In Madden that makes sense but I don’t think the Bills want to give up on a first round pick yet.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Reply to Cutter

Greer can’t tackle as well as McGee. I think it’s pretty bold to say Greer is better. He always covers the #2 receiver so I don’t think you can make that statement yet. Also, McGee has kick return experience.

Whitner= GOODBYE (You cost WAY TOO MUCH MONEY and we can easily replace you)

I agree the guy has no performed. However Whitner has not exactly been put in a position to perform well. The Bills don’t really generate any pressure and they have asked Whitner to play in multiple positions (which makes him somewhat of an asset). Whitner is a leader and I think is a necessary part to the football team.

Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.

- Plato

by buffaloboy90 on Feb 8, 2009 2:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

that I agree with

Keeping Duke Preston as Center, and the thought that Alvin Bowen could be our starting OLB this year…not so much, but different perspectives on players are always interesting to hear. I have thought extremely highly of Greer from his first game and I think we gotta re-sign him.

by thejimbo on Feb 8, 2009 2:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

To MRW

Rec’d.

I never understood how some people thought we were going to be able to make a big splash this year in FA.

by krytime on Feb 8, 2009 5:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

whoa whoa kry

that is a worst case scenario using contract numbers that are nowhere going to be near that high. Greer, Peters and Crowell are all going to make less than outlined about. As MRW said, this is a worst case scenario.

Kawika Mitchell is a leader. He will help this young team develop.

by poz on Feb 8, 2009 5:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I get that...

And I actually don’t think they’ll sign Greer or Crowell. But I also don’t think they’ll make any substantial cuts either. I’ve just been of the opinion that by the time they sign/extend some guys who we’ve agreed they should, there won’t be much money left to spend on FAs.

I still say they won’t be able to sign a “big name” guy, and will likely have to settle with 2nd tier sort of guys (like Mitchell & Johnson).

~~Peters~~ Parker is going to demand a lot. A lot.

by krytime on Feb 8, 2009 6:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Crowell is a second-tier guy.

for the record.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 8, 2009 6:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I can agree with that.

by krytime on Feb 8, 2009 6:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

isn't greer too?

I don’t even know if we need a top tier guy except for Suggs or Brown. And if he does hit the market I hope the Bills find a way to open up some cap room. I would say Birk and all others are second tier.

Kawika Mitchell is a leader. He will help this young team develop.

by poz on Feb 8, 2009 7:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd call him 2nd tier.

The problem in all of this is that 2nd tier guys are getting contracts that 1st tier guys got only a few years back.

Damn agents.

by krytime on Feb 8, 2009 7:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

so true.

Kawika Mitchell is a leader. He will help this young team develop.

by poz on Feb 8, 2009 8:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Plus Greer is a second tier guy

with no real first tier free agents at his position. He won’t cash in like Clements but in comparison Greer’s deal is going to be much bigger than people might want. It’s a reason I think he’ll be gone.

Playing Eternal Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 9, 2009 9:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

All I can say is wow...

What a friggin’ joke that rookie contracts are even able to be used as benchmarks for established stars these days.

Something absolutely has to be done about players that have proven nothing getting massive deals, especially with the amount of guaranteed money involved.

It’s like the earning capacity for an NFL player is directly based on where he’s drafted unless he holds out. Guys like Boldin, not taken in the first round get a very modest rookie deal. They outperform it, and since they’re playing for peanuts, the club offers a very franchise-friendly extension. Fearing injury or whatever, the player has no choice but to sign in- every single person here would do the same. Peters is another example…

It just sucks that the money is so unreasonable because it can be based on what top 5 picks of the NFL draft make.

by Make a play Whitner on Feb 8, 2009 10:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Blame the agents...

by krytime on Feb 9, 2009 12:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

isnt the rookie contract problem

part of the reason they are renegotiating after next season? i know it was done here earlier but someone needs to explain again what the hell is going on because I am still confused

Kawika Mitchell is a leader. He will help this young team develop.

by poz on Feb 9, 2009 12:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs