Are we seriously going to let Levitre walk?
#1
Posted 08 February 2013 - 09:20 PM
I cannot understand how this could happen or what the justification would be
#2
Posted 08 February 2013 - 09:28 PM
#3
Posted 08 February 2013 - 09:30 PM
#4
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:04 PM
#5
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:10 PM
mrags, on 08 February 2013 - 10:04 PM, said:
#6
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:13 PM
FluffHead, on 08 February 2013 - 10:10 PM, said:
Just saying, this has been beat to death already in another thread and it still means nothing anyway.
Fwiw, I don't think we will resign him before the FA period starts. I feel he will test the market and who knows what happens then.
#7
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:15 PM
I know LeVitre will be looking to make north of what Ben Grubbs got last year, and I don't think the Bills are going to spend $7+ million on a solid guard.
There are 2 other things to take notice of:
1. There is no was we use the franchise tag on him, as it's way too expensive for OL, and it needs to be saved for Byrd if a long term deal can't be worked out with him.
2. I think the Bills focused on gettig the Urbik deal done when they did, because they knew there was a high likelihood that LeVitre would be looking for more than they're willing to offer.
I don't want to downplay the significance of losing a really good player, because the Bills certainly don't need to be creating holes on this team, but..................with that said, I can't say that I disagree with the Bills philosophy of not spending beaucoup bucks on an OG. It's not an overly valued position in the NFL for a reason. If LeVitre was as good vs. the run as he is vs. the pass then, maybe, I'd be more adamant that we can't let him go, but truth be told he doesn't really get much push in the run game.
The priority this offseason is clearly Byrd.
The dropoff from LeVitre to an okay guard like Brandon Moore (FA G of the Jets) isn't nearly as steep as the drop off from Byrd to a so so safety like Eric Smith (another FA S of the Jets.)
Bottom line, is there are WAY more servicable G's in the NFL than there are S's. This is why I've been saying Byrd was of much higher importance to retain over LeVitre for the better part of a year. It was an unpopular thought at the time, but I think the Bills front office sees things similarly.
Edited by Estro, 08 February 2013 - 10:24 PM.
#8
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:20 PM
#9
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:21 PM
#10
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:21 PM
nix's philosophy is to build from the lines out.
i would say its more likely that if were going to lose levitre or byrd, byrd goes.
#11
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:30 PM
Derek in Va, on 08 February 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:
I cannot understand how this could happen or what the justification would be
What do you suggest the Bills do with a player that has openly said he wants to test free agency? I don't think there's any doubt we would like to sign him right now, but you do realize he has to want to sign prior to free agency right? There's two things that are going to happen, he's either going to get franchised, or we will have to see if he'll sign if we match/exceed what he commands on the open market.
The Bills are in an obviously touchy situation because of Byrd. I can only imagine they are working hard to sign Byrd or Levitre to be able to franchise the other. And both players and their agents know that.
#12
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:36 PM
Estro, on 08 February 2013 - 10:15 PM, said:
I know LeVitre will be looking to make north of what Ben Grubbs got last year, and I don't think the Bills are going to spend $7+ million on a solid guard.
There are 2 other things to take notice of:
1. There is no was we use the franchise tag on him, as it's way too expensive for OL, and it needs to be saved for Byrd if a long term deal can't be worked out with him.
2. I think the Bills focused on gettig the Urbik deal done when they did, because they knew there was a high likelihood that LeVitre would be looking for more than they're willing to offer.
I don't want to downplay the significance of losing a really good player, because the Bills certainly don't need to be creating holes on this team, but..................with that said, I can't say that I disagree with the Bills philosophy of not spending beaucoup bucks on an OG. It's not an overly valued position in the NFL for a reason. If LeVitre was as good vs. the run as he is vs. the pass then, maybe, I'd be more adamant that we can't let him go, but truth be told he doesn't really get much push in the run game.
The priority this offseason is clearly Byrd.
The dropoff from LeVitre to an okay guard like Brandon Moore (FA G of the Jets) isn't nearly as steep as the drop off from Byrd to a so so safety like Eric Smith (another FA S of the Jets.)
Bottom line, is there are WAY more servicable G's in the NFL than there are S's. This is why I've been saying Byrd was of much higher importance to retain over LeVitre for the better part of a year. It was an unpopular thought at the time, but I think the Bills front office sees things similarly.
???
Didn't some numbers just come out from PFF that we averaged like ten yards a carry running behind him??
#13
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:41 PM
#14
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:43 PM
Derek in Va, on 08 February 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:
I cannot understand how this could happen or what the justification would be
You are despairing over something that has not even been rumoured to be true.
They have good medication now a days for this sort of thing.
#15
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:44 PM
#16
Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:56 PM
#17
Posted 08 February 2013 - 11:03 PM
Estro, on 08 February 2013 - 10:15 PM, said:
The priority this offseason is clearly Byrd.
The dropoff from LeVitre to an okay guard like Brandon Moore (FA G of the Jets) isn't nearly as steep as the drop off from Byrd to a so so safety like Eric Smith (another FA S of the Jets.)
Bottom line, is there are WAY more servicable G's in the NFL than there are S's. This is why I've been saying Byrd was of much higher importance to retain over LeVitre for the better part of a year. It was an unpopular thought at the time, but I think the Bills front office sees things similarly.
this is my thinking too
its far easier to approach levitres performance at a lower cost than byrds. you usually cant keep everybody and you have to make tough choices. if levitre doesnt give a hometown discount down from being one of the highest paid guards in the league then hes probably gone, and i can understand that
#18
Posted 08 February 2013 - 11:05 PM











