Why Hasn't Kelsay Been Cut?
I am ridiculously shocked that Kelsay has not been cut yet. He is due plenty of money, money which he does not deserve since he is nothing but a back up in this league...well should be. He cannot play DE in a 3-4. He is undersized. He also cannot play OLB because he is not fluid with his hips and will not be able to cover guys in space, nor do I think Schobel will be able too. Kelsay should have been cut last year, even though he had his best season last year, he still isn't worth what he is getting paid. He will be lucky to be some teams back up if he does get cut.
In my opinion if anyone should have stayed out of the three that were just released it would have been Denny (even tho i liked the national attention with T.O). At least the guy is a very tall guy that maybe could have played DE in a 3-4. No, he probably wouldn't have been a great fit, but better than Kelsay and would have costed less. I realize Denny was a free agent and I do agree with letting him go because he really doesn't serve a purpose in a 3-4. Kelsay on the other hand is costing us big bucks and won't be able to contribute in a 3-4. What do you think? You guys think he will get cut? I've wanted Kelsay off this team for 3 years now, and if he stays another year wearing that dark visor thinking he looks bad A$$ i might just punch myself in the nads =)
Just another great fan opinion shared on the pages of BuffaloRumblings.com.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’m no Kelsay fan but why do you care about how much he’s getting paid? There’s not even a salary cap to consider anymore. I’m hoping that Buffalo is trying to parlay what was a productive season (by Kelsay’s standards) into a late round draft pick.
Tinted visors, I believe, are only worn by players who are light sensitive (photophobia) so he’s not trying to look cool but rather trying to avoid throbbing headaches. You know, like the kind he causes fans who sit and ponder why he’s still on the team.
It can always get worse. Let me tell you how.
by Ron From NM on Feb 28, 2010 8:16 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Thanks Ron for the comment!!!
It’s not like I was speechless, I just couldn’t print the words I was thinking.
This is like dumping a new puzzle from it's box. Now let's start putting the peices together. I guess this is what we all asked for.
ill buy photophobia for Kelsay.
But not for guys who really are trying to be cool. ie LT, Ray Lewis, Brian Dawkins.
Its funny how no offensive or defensive linemen or wide receiver are photophobic. just linebackers, safetys and RBs. (glory positions)
I believe the league requires a player to have an eye doctor sign off on photophobia before allowing a player to wear a tinted visor. As someone who is photophobic (and I don’t like cameras either) let me shed some, um, light on why we don’t see WRs and perhaps DLs with tinted visors.
Human vision is predicated on light in that we only see objects when light is reflected off of them. Tinting, whether sunglasses, visors or darkened windows in your vehicle limit the amount of light that reaches your eyes. Different colored tinting, by the way, cuts out different wavelengths of light and many people who are photophobic would do better with, say, a redish hue than grey….because grey cuts out all wavelengths fairly evenly while another color will cut out some wavelengths almost entirely while letting others pass through unfettered. It’s why some people really like wearing those yellowish ‘driving glasses’ you sometimes see on TV.
The good news for a photophobe is that the tinting alleviates symptoms of photophobia, most importantly the dull throbbing headaches most commonly associated with the condition. The bad news is that tinting—particularly colors like grey that cut out all wavelengths evenly—simultaneously reduces acuity. For example, imagine reading the eye chart at the eye doctor’s with sunglasses. You’d likely lose a line or two on the acuity chart. If you didn’t know that acuity isn’t really all that important for driving (visual fields are far more important—and never tested by the DMV) you might get scared when you think of the fact that many of use are at the bottom end of the legal eye performance limit for driving (20/40) and almost everyone then puts on sunglasses when they drive which drops their acuity a line or two. But I digress, because that’s what I do….
A WR has to catch a fast moving object while he himself is in motion and trying to keep track of any DBs who are about to take his head off. Reducing his acuity, which is vital for catching the ball (the peripheral vision is assigned the task of watching everything else), would hurt a WRs overall performance. So, if a WR is photophobic his options are to put up with the symptoms or find a new line of work. Well, that’s not entirely true. He could get a tinted visor that cut out the specific wavelength(s) of light that caused him problems but let in all of the other wavelengths. He would then not have headaches and also wouldn’t see a drop in his visual acuity.
But his visor might be pink.
It can always get worse. Let me tell you how.
by Ron From NM on Feb 28, 2010 10:29 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I forgot a couple of things...
The loss of acuity I’m talking about is very minor, a line or two on an eye chart. However, the NFL is a place where minute details matter….and that line or two may be the difference between making a catch or not when all other stressing factors (figure ground against which ball is coming, position of the sun, veiling or dazzle glare, big guy coming to take his head off, etc) are taken into account.
DLs have to be able to see the ball that his partially hidden by the arm of a RB or still in the hand of a QB who is trying to hide the ball behind his back on a play fake. Reduced acuity would be a bad thing for a DL. They’re used to headaches anyway, what with all the pounding they take.
There’s really no reason for a photophobic OL not to go with tinting. After all, a minor loss of acuity isn’t going to keep them from seeing the big fat guy in front of them. I’m kind of amazed that we don’t see virtually all OLs wear visors (clear) just to keep the fingers of DLs out of their eyes. I’m guessing that the players would rather not have a little window for rain to streak down or to fog up in cold weather.
There is, by the way, one QB in the league who has a tinted visor—never mind that the reduced acuity could indeed hamper his performance—and his name has been intermittently tied to Buffalo: Mike Vick. I’m not saying that Vick sucks because he wears a tinted visor. The little bit of an edge that he loses due to his visor certainly doesn’t help matters, though for my money his suckiness revolves around bigger issues like work ethic and the inability to consistently read defenses.
It can always get worse. Let me tell you how.
by Ron From NM on Feb 28, 2010 10:41 AM EST up reply actions
Im going to start off by saying this. Damn. I just got worked by these responses. And for that, i’ll rec you. Recommend you that is.
I think the original visor was meant to prevent eye pokes. And tinting was something that came about later as a fashionable thing. And while I am aware of the wonders of the prism, and certain visors are meant to block certain wavelengths. I would assume there is a fairly small amount of players that actually suffer from this.
And just to play devil’s advocate, I would be inclined to think guys like Dawkins, Vick and Lewis really don’t have these problems and got a doctors note from some starstruck optomologist. But thats just me.
by BillsfanDan on Feb 28, 2010 10:56 AM EST up reply actions
Since the symptoms are internal it would be relatively easy for a player to claim that he was having issues (if he knew which symptoms to play up) when he saw his eye doctor.
“Doc, I’ve been having this low-grade but persistent headache for a couple of years now. I’ve been hitting it with Tylenol but that doesn’t work anymore. I’ve noticed that I tend to get headaches when I’m around bright lights but it tends to diminish or go away when I wear shades. It’s weird because I get a headache watching TV but not when I go to the movies. Could it be my vision?”
“Sure. You could be photophobic. The shades are cutting out light and that is the source of your headache. You’re having issues with TVs but not movies because TVs are direct light while movies are reflected light. Get some prescription sunglasses and put them on when the light bothers you, even if it is indoors. I could send you to a low vision specialist to find out which wavelength is bothering you but you’ll probably refuse to wear yellow shades anyway so just go with grey since it cuts out light evenly.”
“The NFL says I need to have a note from a doctor to wear a tinted visor.”
“No problem. Here you go. Can you sign this football for my kid?”
“Sure. Thanks, doc.”
It can always get worse. Let me tell you how.
by Ron From NM on Feb 28, 2010 11:21 AM EST up reply actions
I would think that not only are certain wavelengths a problem but also the phase of the light, which is what most sunglasses filter out (certain phases).
2010 Bills' truth in advertising: "Look out Cleveland, this year we score 6!" - bluecollarbuffalo
by thefourwinds on Feb 28, 2010 4:36 PM EST up reply actions
Anquan Boldin wears a visor
Julius Peppers wears a visor
Chris Canty wears a visor
Mike Goff (offensive lineman) wears a visor
Bobby McCray wears a visor
Santonio Holmes wears a visor, I think
The guy this post is about wears a visor.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
Still can’t bring yourself to say his name can you K?
The more I see, the les I know.
by CanadianBillsFan on Mar 1, 2010 12:38 AM EST up reply actions
Chris Ke
Chris Kuuuh
Chris Keeeell
Chris Kellss
Gah, can’t do it! :)
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on Mar 1, 2010 12:39 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
LOL Well played!
The more I see, the les I know.
by CanadianBillsFan on Mar 1, 2010 3:00 AM EST up reply actions
Your right on the tinted visor thing. The league put in a new rule in 2008 regarding visors. A player can now only wear a titanted visor, of any color, by prescription. Otherwise the visor has to be clear.
The more I see, the les I know.
by CanadianBillsFan on Feb 28, 2010 9:03 AM EST up reply actions
Remarkably coherent for 4:21 AM. Ruined it with the nad abuse. Do you people ever sleep?!
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Feb 28, 2010 8:47 AM EST reply actions
Common Brian, we’re a bunch of imsonmiacs here at the Rumblings, you should know that!
The more I see, the les I know.
by CanadianBillsFan on Feb 28, 2010 9:00 AM EST up reply actions
lol I never can sleep, i spend most of my time wondering around NFL.com combine videos, mock drafts, rumblings and twobillsdrive. I have nothing to do with my life until medical school starts…then ill be busy as hell. In the meantime, I do what i love, and thats talking and researching bills football.
My money is on Draft day trade.
Hoping to get a 5th, 6th, or 7th rounder for him. He did have a productive season last year after all.
And if it’s not that, maybe Chan intends on seeing what he can do at OLB with a camp invite and evaluate him from there. At whish point I’m sure that you’ll get your wish as I’m positive he’d be in the first round of cuts.
The more I see, the les I know.
by CanadianBillsFan on Feb 28, 2010 9:02 AM EST reply actions
No trade possible
With Kelsay’s unexplainable stratospheric salary.
I got nothing.
by Jason from OH-IO on Feb 28, 2010 9:59 AM EST up reply actions
With the options of taking a reduced salary—but likely a new multi-year contract—or no salary at all when the Bills cut him, you’d have to think that Kelsay would accept the reduced salary and multi-year deal. Besides, if the Bills cut him his contract is null and void and any team that picked him up would sign him to a lower paying multi-year contract. I don’t see it as an issue.
It can always get worse. Let me tell you how.
by Ron From NM on Feb 28, 2010 10:31 AM EST up reply actions
How can it not be an “issue” relative to a trade? The team acquiring him would have to have the opportunity to work out a new contract… This basically eliminates the possiblity of a draft day trade. It would be a trade that would take 24-48 hours to complete.
I got nothing.
by Jason from OH-IO on Feb 28, 2010 11:03 AM EST up reply actions
He’s only due about 3.5M next year. Thats very reasonable for a 5+ sack DE.
The more I see, the les I know.
by CanadianBillsFan on Feb 28, 2010 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
its not valuable to a guy that can’t stay home and gets burned EVERY time a team runs a reverse or counter play to his side. Its very funny watching him go, “o crap, just got burned again.” You should try to find some clips. He can never stay home. Schobel on the other hand is very good at staying home while still maintaining to get pressure on the QB.
That doesn't matter
There’s no salary cap, and he’s only scheduled to make $3.5M….
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
Kelsay hasnt been cut because there is a huge conspiracy to make Kurupt's head explode......
and that day will come when Kelsay is enshrined on the Bills Wall of Fame right next to Bruce Smith.
Mark. My. Words.
"I have to bite my tongue not to ask how his wealth of experience with mediocrity is helping him prepare to make the Bills mediocre." - SB Nation's Peter Bean about Chan Gailey during the NFL Scouting Combine
by norcaliangelsfan on Feb 28, 2010 11:10 AM EST reply actions
I think there are three main factors in Kelsay still being on the team.
The first is that despite his high salary, he’s not costing the team anything now. He doesn’t really make much money until the regular season starts, so there’s no difference between cutting him in six months or cutting him yesterday.
2nd is trade value and I do think he has some. Troy Williamson is a far worse player than Kelsay’s ever been and Minnesota was able to trade him despite a 6th overall pick salary. And believe it or not, but Kelsay’s contract isn’t really any bigger than what a team would have to give him on the open market. Kelsay got an absurd 8 million dollar signing bonus and made 12 mil in the first season of his new contract. So suddenly, Kelsay’s crazy 4 year, 23 mil deal becomes very reasonable for the next three seasons including this upcoming year. By my math, Kelsay is due a little over 4 mil this year which is probably less than some team would give him in year 1 of a new contract. I think he’s got trade value, even if it’s just a late round pick.
I also think that Buffalo wants to see him in action in the March and April minicamps before cutting him. There’s no harm in the Bills giving him a chance to impress at a new position (even though it’s probably obvious to them that he won’t) and there’s no harm in shopping him around leading up to the draft and during the draft weekend before cuting him.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
by kaisertown on Feb 28, 2010 11:41 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
rec'd
I’d love to see Kelsay packaged with a guy with more value like Whitner to help us use a pick to move up in a round.
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
I’m all for using Kelsay to move up in a round. Using Whiter and Kelsay to move up in a round? Probably not….
Swapping Buffalo’s 4th round pick and Kelsay plus Philly’s 6th might let entice Philly to part with 88. Buffalo would have a pair of thirds, no 4th, and just one 6th.
It can always get worse. Let me tell you how.
by Ron From NM on Feb 28, 2010 12:53 PM EST up reply actions
I'd take a pair of thirds
over a fourth and two 6ths any day. Are two thirds enough to move back into the second?
"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny
yes, but
an early 3rd and a late 3rd which is the above scenario would likely get you into the 2nd half of round 2. Depending on how interested teams are that pick could be between 20 and 30 in round 2 at a guess.
"Fan ?" You want to talk about being a fan of the Bills ? Try getting up at 3 AM every Monday to watch their games knowing they'll likely lose. Do this for 18 years and then call yourself a "fan"
you would however
be giving up kelsay, a 3rd and a 4th to move into the late 2nd and get a 6th as a throw in – you’d really have to want the guy you’re targeting pretty badly !! (Not because of kelsay but the 3rd and 4th)
"Fan ?" You want to talk about being a fan of the Bills ? Try getting up at 3 AM every Monday to watch their games knowing they'll likely lose. Do this for 18 years and then call yourself a "fan"
Possibly. Buffalo could try to trade Kelsay, 73, the 4th and eagles’ 6th for the Eagles’ second rounder. That would leave Buffalo with 9, 41, 55, no 3rd, no 4th, and 1 pick each in the 5th, 6th and 7th. I don’t know that I’d prefer that to the pair of 3rd rounders.
All of this, of course, presumes that the Eagles would want Kelsay and value him as something in the neighborhood of a 5th round pick.
It can always get worse. Let me tell you how.
Ron you are a trade thinking machine arent you?
Between this and your excellent OL analsys during the year what else could you possibly think about?
LOL.
The only cure for a bad today is tomorrow.
by norcaliangelsfan on Feb 28, 2010 2:12 PM EST up reply actions
Why would Philly want him?
They need a pass rusher….
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
well that is the holy trinity isnt it.....
Offensive line analsys, nfl trade scenerios, and hoop girl…
Of course :-)
The only cure for a bad today is tomorrow.
by norcaliangelsfan on Feb 28, 2010 3:05 PM EST reply actions
Why hasn't Kelsay been cut?
A new form of torture for yours truly.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
What if he excels at OLB... what will you do then?
The sentence will be slow digestion over a thousand years in the Sarlacc pit.

May the force be with Chan.
"They're Killin' Me Whitey. They're Killin' Me" -- Lou Saban
I know what that is from
But at first glance, I wanted it to be from Tremors.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
You should have used the pre-CGI version of the sarlacc that looked like Legos.
Or used this picture:

Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Mar 2, 2010 6:54 PM EST up reply actions
Why would they cut him now? Why not have a look at him during OTAs, minicamp, and training camp before cutting him if that’s what they decide? Unless they owe him a roster bonus between now and then there’s no reason to cut him now.
They didn’t cut Denney, Reed, or T.O. They just said they weren’t going to re-sign them.
YES WE CHAN!
Tweet
Your daily source for Buffalo Bills information.

by 



























