McClain, Mathews Deals Key To Timely Spiller Signing

by Brian Galliford on Jul 21, 2010 10:30 AM EDT in Buffalo Bills News

We're now a mere eight days away from the start of 2010 Buffalo Bills training camp. We already know of one player - veteran defensive end Aaron Schobel - that won't be reporting to St. John Fisher College next Thursday. Two more players - rookies C.J. Spiller and Torell Troup - are the only remaining unsigned players on the roster, and thus should be the focal point of Bills discussions over the next week (or perhaps beyond).

I've been asked several times over the past few days which rookie deals are most important to getting Troup and, more importantly, Spiller, into camp on time. The operative words there are "on time," because the general slotting principle of rookie signings takes care of which players are most important to creating parameters for Spiller and Troup deals. In order to figure out which players are most important to getting deals in place for Buffalo's two rookies prior to next Thursday, we'll simply take a look at the rookies that are reporting to camp before Spiller and Troup do. Cliff's notes version: it's a virtual certainty that Troup will be signed, and a growing likelihood (approaching certainty) that Spiller will hold out.

We'll start with a look at the 13 rookies that will reporting to their respective training camps before Bills rookies. There are more rookies, but these 13 are particularly relevant to Buffalo's two remaining unsigned draftees.

Rd.	#	Team	Player	Pos.	Report Date
1	1	St. Louis Rams	Sam Bradford	QB	7/28 (rookies), 7/30 (vets)
1	7	Cleveland Browns	Joe Haden	CB	7/23 (rookies), 7/30 (vets)
1	8	Oakland Raiders	Rolando McClain	LB	7/28 (rookies and vets)
1	9	Buffalo Bills	C.J. Spiller	RB	7/29 (rookies and vets)
1	12	San Diego Chargers	Ryan Mathews	RB	7/25 (rookies), 7/30 (vets)
1	13	Philadelphia Eagles	Brandon Graham	DE	7/26 (rookies), 7/30 (vets)
2	37	Philadelphia Eagles	Nate Allen	S	7/26 (rookies), 7/30 (vets)
2	38	Cleveland Browns	T.J. Ward	S	7/23 (rookies), 7/30 (vets)
2	41	Buffalo Bills	Torell Troup	DT	7/29 (rookies and vets)
2	42	New England Patriots	Rob Gronkowski	TE	7/25 (rookies), 7/28 (vets)
2	43	Baltimore Ravens	Sergio Kindle	LB	7/26 (rookies), 7/28 (vets)
2	44	Oakland Raiders	Lamarr Houston	DT	7/28 (rookies and vets)
2	45	Denver Broncos	Zane Beadles	OG	7/26 (rookies), 7/31 (vets)

Here are the rest of the 11 rookies (which makes 24 in all) that remain unsigned and play for teams that will report to camp before Buffalo. We're keeping the list to first- and second-round picks, as they're obviously most pertinent to Spiller and Troup.

Rd.	#	Team	Player	Pos.	Report Date
1	21	Cincinnati Bengals	Jermaine Gresham	TE	7/28 (rookies and vets)
1	22	Denver Broncos	Demaryius Thomas	WR	7/26 (rookies), 7/31 (vets)
1	25	Denver Broncos	Tim Tebow	QB	7/26 (rookies), 7/31 (vets)
1	27	New England Patriots	Devin McCourty	CB	7/25 (rookies), 7/28 (vets)
2	33	St. Louis Rams	Rodger Saffold	OT	7/28 (rookies), 7/30 (vets)
2	48	Carolina Panthers	Jimmy Clausen	QB	7/28 (rookies and vets)
2	53	New England Patriots	Jermaine Cunningham	LB	7/25 (rookies), 7/28 (vets)
2	54	Cincinnati Bengals	Carlos Dunlap	DE	7/28 (rookies and vets)
2	57	Baltimore Ravens	Terrence Cody	DT	7/26 (rookies), 7/28 (vets)
2	59	Cleveland Browns	Montario Hardesty	RB	7/23 (rookies), 7/30 (vets)
2	62	New England Patriots	Brandon Spikes	LB	7/25 (rookies), 7/28 (vets)

Finally, in case you're behind the times on tracking which first- and second-round picks have already signed league-wide, you're in luck: that list is a very short one.

Rd.	#	Team	Player	Pos.	Terms
2	35	Tampa Bay Buccaneers	Brian Price	DT	4 years, $5.35M, $2.75M G
2	61	New York Jets	Vladimir Ducasse	OG	4 years, $3.225M, $1.435M G

Tweet Comment 76 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

never

cease to marvel at the depth and detail of the information you send our way. Thanks!

Oh… and the only thing that will eliminate such “posturing” by rookies is a rookie salary scale(IMO)

The future ain't what it used to be - Yogi Berra

by fansince60 on Jul 21, 2010 10:42 AM EDT reply actions

If only every other job in the world treated unproven professional-level talent the same way. I know it’s a professional sport and the money is much different than anything else, but it’’ll never cease to amaze me how teams are so willing to give up so much for a guy just out of diapers.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions

spot on.

by BuffaloChip on Jul 21, 2010 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions

greed

motivates both sides

The future ain't what it used to be - Yogi Berra

by fansince60 on Jul 21, 2010 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Then WHY!!

Do most of us have such high expectations for these guys in making a impact from day one. That’s the part I don’t understand. I agree, I would like to see these millions tacked on to the end of a contract as incentives for contributions earned. Still Spiller is expected to solve our offensive wounds and Troup is to solve our defense against the run, right out of the gate. Hence the conflict.

YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde

by VanScottM on Jul 21, 2010 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions

It’s funny. I don’t look at Spiller as a player brought in to solve their offensive woes. Sure, he’s dynamic and all, but I think the running game did well with Jackson last season. TDs were lacking (so maybe that’s part of the Spiller “magic”) but Spiller likely won’t change the problems on the line and under center. We’ve all seen what Adrian Peterson can do, but without Brett Favre, he was not the savior everyone hoped for. The same can be said for Chris Johnson. Arguably, it was Vince Young (what?!) who “saved” their season last year. Sure, Johnson had a storybook year in terms of stats, but they were losing 8 games while he was piling on the yards and Collins was the QB.

Long of the short: Spiller is awesome, but i’m hopeful they didn’t feel the RB position was the area in need of greatest improvement. Perhaps they found him to be a quick upgrade, with a small learning curvie. Perhaps they just wanted their Bugatti Veyron for the garage.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Gonna have to disagree there.

you don’t think Spiller was brought in to solve offensive woes? the very first selection from the new offensive minded head coach is a top ten RB, and his role isn’t to help our coaches take us from the bottom of the league in offense up to the top? I think it is.

FS Jairus Byrd aka the Buffalo Bills' Silver Lining

by Ren Diggity on Jul 21, 2010 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions

No, i’m not really saying I don’t think he was actually brought in to solve offensive woes. I’m saying I don’t look at him that way, or perhaps better said, I wouldn’t probably have viewed his as a position where an upgrade was needed more than others. Because yes, i’m fairly certain that Gailey and Nix wanted everything to do with upgrading the RB position with him. I just see it differently. There seems to have been some concern on their part in that backfield, maybe the Lynch stuff, maybe not. But to me, that team scores more TDs if the line does a better job.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions

Gailey was brought in to solve our offensive woes.

That’s my opinion. Spiller is not going to hurt us in that regard. Our running game last season was dare I say, average or mediocre. Freddy Jackson is a very good back and surpassed 1,000 yards rushing but let’s not ignore those eight to ten games in the middle of the season where it would of been nice to have a running game. Something to bale Trent, Fitz or Brian out of slumps. Something to run time off the clock when we needed to. Our running game last year was very pedestrian and lower middle class at that.

My point I attempted to make above and failed miserably at again was the expectation we put on first and second year players. If our season is mediocre and average again this year it won’t be as much because of the players we have as much as it is they are young and lack experience at this level. This is all soon to end if we can stop this massive injury bug.

YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde

by VanScottM on Jul 21, 2010 11:27 PM EDT up reply actions

I thought Cornell Green was brought in to solve our offensive woes?!?!

~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 Jul 22, 2010 1:20 AM EDT up reply actions

Dwan Edwards and Andra Davis

Two experienced defensive players who were brought in to shore up our defensive front. Cornell Green hasn’t done anything to hurt us at this point and lets hope he doesn’t. Worst case for Green is quality depth at the tackle spot. That would be a step up from 2009.

YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde

by VanScottM on Jul 22, 2010 8:02 AM EDT up reply actions

It's called instant gratification

by blknites on Jul 22, 2010 5:53 AM EDT up reply actions

Teams don’t want to, it’s just the current salary structure. It makes no sense, and hopefully the union is willing to concede a system in the next CBA that benefits rookies less and veterans more.

by cjf4 on Jul 21, 2010 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions

If the teams didn't want to, they wouldn't.

If you don’t want to pay a rookie the slotted money, you can trade the pick or pass it. Teams do it very rarely. While it’s true that you need a partner to trade down, which can be hard to find, draft picks are, if anything, overvalued when trading for players. If you don’t want to shell out the big bucks for a top 10 pick, I’m sure you can find a reliable, mid-salary vet for your trouble, easy. Or at the very least, there’s always a high 2nd round pick available for next year’s 1st rounder.

Teams pay because they think it’s worth it. They might be wrong – I can’t really judge – but they’re paying because that’s what the market dictates.

by silvermike on Jul 21, 2010 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions

Good point about draft picks being overvalued in player trades.

That’s exactly my stance, if you are not in the position to get the guy you really like in the draft, trading that overvalued pick for a proven commodity at a position of need makes perfect sense to me.

"Ability without character will lose. The Bills are going to be a team of high character. That stamp I will push very hard. I hope we can convey that to our fans and project something very special to the rest of the nation." - Marv Levy

by BuffaloBlueBlood on Jul 21, 2010 2:52 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

agreed

makes perfect sense

Unfortunately, perfect sense in the NFL is as prevalent a commodity as logic!

The future ain't what it used to be - Yogi Berra

by fansince60 on Jul 21, 2010 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions

This is not a sport-only phenomenon...

software and technology companies did this prior to the tech-bubble bursting…huge signing bonus were being given to recent graduates with no actual experience to leaen on…it happened recently immediately after the wall-street bailouts…the top earners in the investment fields (the top-tier FAs) were paid ridiculously well, leaving their jobs for higher paying ones at other firms, leaving their old firm looking for new young talent, bidding against other firms, they throw the red carpet out and most of them will be busts…

Act like a sober human being, not a drunk Internet username. -- Brian Galliford

by NorCal BillsFan on Jul 21, 2010 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions

I wonder why more teams don't trade out of the first round

While i haven’t compiled any data, it seems to me that second and even third-round picks might have much greater value than first-rounders. For example, if a first rounder costs twice as much as a second rounder (at the same draft position), then you’d want the former to have either twice the impact for the team or to be twice as likely to succeed at all. My impression is that first rounders may cost more like 3 to 5 times as much as second rounders. So if you could trade down and get 2 second-round picks (this year’s and next) for your first rounder, that should be a good deal. The money saved could be spent much more wisely in the free agent market where you know what you’re getting.

Again, i don’t have records, but thinking back on the Bills first-rounders over the last few years leads me to think that the team might be significantly better if we could have traded for more picks in rounds 2 and 3, much improving our odds of finding impact players. You’re throwing the dice with any draft pick, so the more throws you get, the better your odds unless the odds on a player drop precipitously from round 1 to 2.

So why don’t more teams do this, as NE has so often in past years? The answer may be that many teams would like to, but seldom can they find a partner for the deal, a team foolish enough or desperate enough to trade up. If that’s the case, then the pay-scale is really out of whack.

by Sixteenthback on Jul 21, 2010 11:51 AM EDT reply actions

I think many teams want to (and probably try to) but there aren’t a ton of suitors. It’s not always easy to get people to take your top 5 pick.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions

That means the pay scale is irrational...

because were it rational, trades would occur frequently since teams have different needs.

by Sixteenthback on Jul 21, 2010 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions

It’s a hot mess, actually—the whole process.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions

It also means that the draft system hurts teams with the worst records.

Think about it. If a top five pick is a liability, then the system of worst drafting first isn’t helping the league.

by Sixteenthback on Jul 21, 2010 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions

In large part, I agree with you. Look at Detroit and Oakland / LA / does it really matter where they’re from. Then look at Cleveland, and them trading down the past couple seasons. Or observe Indy and where they’d be if they didn’t get the 1st pick overall.

It’s a crapshoot, but I do agree that it’s more likely you’re going to bust on a huge, unproven investment before you find the next Peyton. There are far more Akili’s Heels, JaDoughboy Russell Unathletics, Tim Couch Potatoes, and Darren McInjured’s than there are other players.

However, The opportunity for reward is far more of a reason to pick early than to avoid the risk. It’s basically the lottery, but the only ones guaranteed a payout are the guys being drafted.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions

NE and Draft picks

It’s amazing to me that NE isn’t in the Superbowl every year. Have you looked at how many first, and second rounders they have had since Belicheater has been there? Give Ozzie Newsome those same picks and the Ravens would be Monsters (more so than they currently are, because I think Ravens are going all the way this year.)

by Moose68 on Jul 21, 2010 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions

I have to ask. Why can’t the Bills be proactive for a change and sign their guy first rather then waiting for others to sign and set the market?
I get really tired of this stuff every year. Well I can’t sign because so-and-so hasn’t signed yet. It gets old fast.

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 21, 2010 12:10 PM EDT reply actions

This is where i’m confused. Are we certain that it’s the Bills (and, in general, other NFL teams) who play this game? I always thought it was the player’s agent who told them when to jump. I can’t see any reason why a rookie taken #11 would sign before someone taken #32. What if that player somehow gets a better contract?

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions

#11 won't sign until he (his agent) sees how much #12 is getting.

So that he can be sure that he gets more. That’s how it’s been working.

by Sixteenthback on Jul 21, 2010 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m sure another thing that happens is a deal is on the table, and then the rookie wants that deal in full, instead of losing 10% to his agent. So i’m betting most of them come back with 10% over what they’re offered, at least. It’s all so silly though. As outlined here last offseason, the pay is pretty much already determined. It’ll be a percentage higher than last season’s player taken in the same spot.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Can Spiller report to camp....

without a contract or is that against the rules??

Love those Bills but we're tired of losing......

by coolness1 on Jul 21, 2010 12:15 PM EDT reply actions

That won’t happen, because a camp injury without a contract just isn’t worth the risk.

@BloRumblings, @BrianGalliford

by Brian Galliford on Jul 21, 2010 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions

Can you do a post about this video, please

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy_Z2O16xGY

FootballGamePlan does an excellent analysis of the Bills in 2010. Unlike the NFL Network, this one does not dwell too much on the QB and OL problems.

by Henry_Gale on Jul 21, 2010 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions

That’s a pretty good production. I disagree with a few things (especially when they discuss the athletes at QB,) but they are clearly trying to provide an unbiased ‘big picture’ view of the team. They say Schobel will be part of the team; they’re confident Brohm will be the QB, and they might be sleeping on Stevie Styles, but overall….good solid clip. Thanks for the link, Henry.

Bring on the 2010 NFL season! Go Bills!

by Undee on Jul 22, 2010 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions

This is a great time to remind everyone that the fanshot section is open for business for photos, videos, quotes, and links!

You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings

by MattRichWarren on Jul 23, 2010 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions

I’d imagine he could come in to read the playbook and do all the other things. But there’s no way he sets foot on the field without a contract. It’s too risky if he gets hurt.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions

Rookies

But don’t they show up to OTA’s as part of an agreement that they would be properly compensated if they get hurt. I think there is even insurance taken out on them. Why can’t the same rule apply to Training camp?

by Moose68 on Jul 21, 2010 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions

GREED BABY GREED!!!!

At one time many years back the talk was that the vets deserved the big dollars not the rookies. Before free agency that we know today, teams where allowed every year to protect a certain amount of players by tagging them ( I think the number was 37 ) the rest could be signed by other teams. This lasted from the late 80’s until the early 90’s when it was toss out by the courts as violating the antitrust laws. Then FA evolved to where it is today, the best thing that happened was that a salary cap was included. This gave all teams some what of equal footing..

But things are getting out of control fast with the salary structures for rookies, large markets trying to monopolize the league and a strike or lock out on the horizon!!!!!!

That’s where the owners are their own worst enemy—-they are willing to give stiffs like JaMarcus Russell a large contract with 30+million guaranteed and now rumor has it that Bradford is looking at 40+ million guaranteed. If a player coming out of college is demanding those kind of $$$‘s, Brady & P. Manning are worth ______ with what they have accomplished in their careers! I can’t understand why the vets aren’t screaming bloody murder on what untested rookies are making. It’s absurd and needs to be changed.

The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad

-- Salvador Dali

by Goose22 on Jul 21, 2010 1:32 PM EDT reply actions

Do you really think NFL owners wouldn’t prefer a system like baseballs where guys don’t get paid until they perform? Of course they would, but the current system prevents that. This is going to be a huge point of emphasis next off season, but It’s not where the contention will be, as I think the owners and union would agree that the pay scale needs to be shifted towards veterans and away from rookies.

The big battle is that the owner’s are going to try limit the amount of money players get as a whole. Green Bay has been complaining about how there not really making that much money due to ballooning salaries, and why there is a very good chance there will be a strike next season.

by cjf4 on Jul 21, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions

Do you really think NFL owners wouldn’t prefer a system like baseballs where guys don’t get paid until they perform?

Yeah, cause Stephen Strasburg proved a whole lot in the pros before he signed a $15 million dollar deal.

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 21, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions

15 million for the top pick

i think thats pretty damn fair……we are talking upwards of 60+ millions for bradford. yea ill take baseballs strategy over football any day…..

plus strasburg was like the second coming of lebron james or tom brady/peyton manning…..

ps thats also a 4 year deal……

Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
To us winning is a tradition. We are victors and need not explain. You may hate us, but your girlfriends love us. - BC
One more than Shaq. - Kobe answering how it felt to win Championship number 5

by silverstreak3k on Jul 21, 2010 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions

he had also already proven himself in the Olympics....

by silverstreak3k on Jul 21, 2010 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions

he had also already proven himself in the Olympics….

Is that a joke?

The level of competition that he faced in the Olympics is nowhere near as good as he will face in the pros. his performance in the Olympics proves nothing as far as his what he will or won’t be able to do in the Majors.

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 21, 2010 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions

No it's not a joke

While I get that the competition is fiercer in the MLB, he still proved he had the good stuff against better players than he faced in college. Every draft guru on this planet knew strasburg was the real deal. I get what you are trying to say, giving a guy 15 million for doing nothing spread out over 4 years (the highest rookie contract in MLB history) and giving a guy 60+ over 5 or 6 years with about half guaranteed is comparing apples to oranges. In baseball you don’t get the big contract until you can perform consistently for at least a year or two. No one is gonna go into any major sports league without compensation, and compensation should relate to how good you should be if you are a rookie. No one will argue that spiller should get as much money as Levi brown, that’s the nature of rookie contracts tho. I think original poster just wants a more modest contract situation for rookies that haven’t proved anything yet.

Point is you will always have to pay highly touted rooked more than they are currently worth, based on injuries and the like, there’s no way we could have rookies if we didn’t. But the way baseball does it, low salary plus keeping the rights to the player to his drafted team, is a far superior method than what the NFL has. Now if only the MLB had a salary cap….

In all honesty, I think basketball has the closest thing to a good contract setup. Have a salary cap, but make it soft, and have caps on how much a guy can earn (contrary to baseball where you can jump from 500k a year to 10 million in one year). If the NFL could merge their own contract situation with the NBA and MLB, we may actually come up with a system that could work across all sports…..just one fans pipe dream though.

by silverstreak3k on Jul 21, 2010 5:45 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

I get what he was saying, but I was simply pointing out that what he said was in fact incorrect to a degree. Sometimes I feel like I am speaking a different language.

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 22, 2010 12:07 AM EDT up reply actions

right.....

and i was trying to point out that he was on point to a larger degree……

by silverstreak3k on Jul 22, 2010 1:30 AM EDT up reply actions

right.....

A rookie having proved nothing other then the ability to generate hype is able to get a large contract. Still not seeing how he is correct on that. The fact that Bradford got a larger contract is irrelevant.

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 22, 2010 7:49 AM EDT up reply actions

he argued that baseball had a better setup because the contracts were more reasonable when you are a rookie

the only guy you can even point to in order to counter is strasburgs record setting contract in baseball, i think he made his point to a tee, and im confused at how bradfords salary is irrelevant since we are comparing the two….(both first rounders, both thought to have great potential, and about45-50 million dollar differences in their respective contracts)…..

so, like he said, in baseball to a large degree, you have to prove yourself before you get the big pay day, whereas in the NFL a rookie can earn more than the majority of players in the league by a lot by day one…..most mlb rookies (if they even make the majors) will earn less than 1 million dollars for their first year

for example parker selected by the rockies in the 2010 draft at 26 overall was slotted to make less than 1.5 million over the life of his contract (usually 4 years). whereas clay matthews signed a 5 year 13.2 million contract for 5 years (over 7 million guaranteed)….

by silverstreak3k on Jul 22, 2010 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions

also

to get to parkers price point in the 2009 NFL draft you would have to go all the way down to number 149 (fifth round pick), and that was only for a 3 year contract.

this year, the 252 person drafted signed a contract for 4 years, 1.8 million dollars…

by silverstreak3k on Jul 22, 2010 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions

And how much of Bradford’s contract is guaranteed? Because 100% of that $15 million contract Strasburg signed is guaranteed. THAT IS WHY IT IS IRRELEVANT!

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 22, 2010 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions

if its like stafford

(which it will actually be more), he will have in excess of 41 million guaranteed…..still relevant….

by silverstreak3k on Jul 23, 2010 1:18 AM EDT up reply actions

Oh for F#$%& sake. I will go beat my head against a wall until the bad men who have bad reading comp go away.

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 23, 2010 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions

I don’t understand how some of this is still eluding your comprehension. Pretty sure I have explained myself in detail pretty well…but that’s ok…..keep beating your head, that can only help…..

by silverstreak3k on Jul 23, 2010 12:57 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

It isn’t me missing the point.

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 23, 2010 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions

whatever

i really dont care anymore. you are obviously missing my point, and apparently i am missing yours. the end

by silverstreak3k on Jul 23, 2010 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions

No comparison

Strassburg though was the #1 pick, the best bet in the draft. It’s a safe bet that he’ll be a very good pitcher, maybe a dominating one. He is a much, much better bet than Bradford is for the NFL. An his contract is what, one-third to one-firth of what Bradford could sign for? His 7.5 million gauranteed is probably a small fraction of what Bradford will get gauranteed. Were i the Rams owner, i wouldn’t gaurantee Bradford anything beyond a signing bonus, but that’s just me, apparently.

by Sixteenthback on Jul 21, 2010 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions

Funny thing is I believe there is no pitcher in the hall of fame that was drafted number 1

by eze on Jul 21, 2010 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions

Please read the whole comment. His quote that I highlighted said the following:

Do you really think NFL owners wouldn’t prefer a system like baseballs where guys don’t get paid until they perform?

The point that I was making is that Stephen Strasburg had proven nothing at the pro level before getting that paycheck.

Strassburg though was the #1 pick, the best bet in the draft. It’s a safe bet that he’ll be a very good pitcher, maybe a dominating one.

Easy to say after having seen him pitch a few games in the pros. But before that he could have been the next Brien Taylor, Paul Wilson or Shawn Abner. All Players who were drafted #1 overall and stunk. All I am saying is that he didn’t prove anything in the pros and still got a very good contract which was in stark contrast to his statement.

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 21, 2010 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions

Poor jilted Mets fan

~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 Jul 22, 2010 1:22 AM EDT up reply actions

Rather a jilted Mets fan then a bandwagon jumping Yankee fan….

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 22, 2010 7:45 AM EDT up reply actions

I read that Brady is scheduled to make a shade over 3 million this season. Something is seriously wrong there.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions

that probably isn't real

Contracts get structured in odd ways, sometimes front-loaded as a way of protecting the player (from injury or getting cut), sometimes with incentives to protect the owner. Over the last 3-5 years, i think Brady is averaging over 10 mil per yer. Just like Marshawn’s nominal pay of ~700 k this year doesn’t give the real picture. He was a first-round pick, with this the last year of his contract, so you have to average over all four years to get the number that matters.

by Sixteenthback on Jul 21, 2010 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions

So true

Players and agents got wise and insisted on upfront money instead of the bloated contracts that looked good on paper but were back loaded. The players would never see the high salaries in the final couple of years of the contracts, in fact many were asked to restructure the final years or get the ax…

The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad

-- Salvador Dali

by Goose22 on Jul 21, 2010 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Oh right. I understand and am aware of the front-loaded contracts. It’s wise to do so that you get the biggest payout when your performance is still at its peak. I still find it strange that Brady (while living off the fat of some land) is still going to make significantly less than Bradford, who hasn’t even won a game, let alone more than one SB.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Rotoworld

Brady was paid a $3.5 million roster bonus on 3/5/2010, which we added to his 2010 base salary of $3.5 million.

You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings

by MattRichWarren on Jul 23, 2010 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions

i think the commish is pushing for a sloting system for rookies so teams will be able to trade out if they want

it always puzzled me how the worst team got punished by spending 50 mill on a player that has never played a down in the nfl cough jamarcus russel cough choke choke cough

my big brother trent edwards
me and trent play catch all the time but for some reason he cant toss it farther than 10 yards so i got really good at slant routes and screens

by Gpluehri on Jul 21, 2010 2:02 PM EDT reply actions

it always puzzled me that the team with a high pick...

doesn’t just wait, and select the player they want where they want to get him

Act like a sober human being, not a drunk Internet username. -- Brian Galliford

by NorCal BillsFan on Jul 21, 2010 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't begrudge the vets...

I don’t begrudge the proven vets making their fair share of the pie after all it is entertainment. I can’t stand on how the draft has evolved making unproven rookies
multi- millionaires without playing a down—-where is their incentive?

The owners are far from being saints, they seem to have many excuses not to pay vets such as he is a young, he needs to prove himself and once some of the vets prove themselves the owners say they are on the downside of their careers or are too old… Such a catch 22!

The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad

-- Salvador Dali

by Goose22 on Jul 21, 2010 2:32 PM EDT reply actions

the ball seems to be rolling for other teams, via rotoworld.com

“The Dolphins have begun contract negotiations with unsigned first- and second-round picks Jared Odrick and Koa Misi.
The team has made formal proposals to both. A source told the Miami Herald that he’s “optimistic about getting Jared into camp on time.” If so, Odrick will be a good bet to supplant Phillip Merling as the Fins’ starting right end."

Looks like Miami wants to get their guy in. I know ours is top 10 but we need to hear of something soon to have any chance of Spiller being on time or even a short hold out.

"I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly"

by poz on Jul 21, 2010 3:32 PM EDT reply actions

Miami needs some good news as things are becoming drama-rific down there. I know Parcells likes his guys there from the start. I can’t imagine he puts up with greedy rookies.

Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Minus the Bear - My Time

by TheAfghanTwilight on Jul 21, 2010 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions

things are becoming drama-rific down there

Ok, im going to sound clueless right now but whats going down in Miami in terms of drama?

"I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly"

by poz on Jul 21, 2010 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions

Jason Ferguson retired. Philip Merling beat up his pregnant girlfriend. Possibly something else….

No weekend spent pantsless is a wasted weekend.

by sireric on Jul 21, 2010 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions

ah right Phil Merling

forgot about that……

"I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly"

by poz on Jul 21, 2010 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions

Schobel

We already know of one player – veteran defensive end Aaron Schobel – that won’t be reporting to St. John Fisher College next Thursday.

Did I miss something? Last I heard about this was from Chris Brown about 10 days ago and while he definitely didn’t sound optimistic about Schobel’s return, he didn’t speculate about there being no chance of a change of heart.

When the pads go on it’s entirely possible he can get the itch to get back to work, ya know?

Did I miss a report?

Thou isth now selling thy KoolAid...

by kgun201 on Jul 21, 2010 4:38 PM EDT reply actions

No You Didn't...

but many of us see it as a forgone conclusion. Personally, I’d be shocked if he shows up.

by mikeo76 on Jul 21, 2010 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions

I agree it's highly unlikely but the piece sounded definitive so I started looking back for something I might have missed.

Thou isth now selling thy KoolAid...

by kgun201 on Jul 21, 2010 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions

Schobel told the Buffalo News he wasn’t going to report to training camp. That was a couple months ago.

You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings

by MattRichWarren on Jul 23, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions

Thanks. The last I heard him say was that if the Bills needs him in September…

Which is basically a short-hand way of saying it’s not going to happen because there’s no way he’d be able to come in and play a new position in a new scheme without camp.

As much as he seems to suggest that he isn’t open to play for another team, I don’t buy it. Seems like he wants the Bills to release him so he is free to pursue other deals. Otherwise it’s retirement.

I could be wrong, but that’s what I’m reading between the lines anyway.

Thou isth now selling thy KoolAid...

by kgun201 on Jul 23, 2010 9:33 PM EDT up reply actions