Settling In

Posted: January 28th, 2016 | Author: | Filed under: Philadelphia Eagles | 554 Comments »

There is no question that Doug Pederson’s opening press conference was a bit shaky. One thing the NFL doesn’t do very well is train assistants to deal with the media. That’s especially true when going from KC to a city like Philly. Nick Foles looked at the media in St. Louis in his first PC out there and something to the effect that “This is it?”.

Standing at a podium in front of a full hoard of media and talking about getting your dream job isn’t easy. You have a ton of thoughts going on in your head. You want to say a few things, but then you will turn control over to the media so they can ask their questions. The circus begins.

Pederson met with a small group of media in Mobile on Wednesday. He was much more comfortable and natural. He’s been on the job for a bit now so he’s getting used to talking. The setting was different. He was near a chain link fence at football practice. Coaches are going to be more natural there than when wearing a suit and standing in an auditorium.

Pederson took the questions from reporters and answered them as honestly as he could. The media actually ran out of things to ask. I think they were genuinely surprised at how the meeting went. Pederson gave them enough nuggets for multiple articles. Unlike Chip, he wasn’t dodging questions and playing the semantics game (“I’m not the GM”).

I came away feeling good about Pederson.

I mentioned yesterday that he might have made a mistake when addressing the issue of Sam Bradford and saying “I look forward to coaching him.” I doubt reporters in KC looked at every nuance of every word he said. As head coach of the Eagles, you better choose your words very carefully when addressing key topics like that.

Maybe Pederson was telling us that they really do want Bradford back.

Maybe he was simply trying to be positive. If so, a better quote would have been something like “Every offensive coach would like to have a talented, veteran QB to work with.” Compliment Bradford, but don’t feed his agent any comments that will boost his value.

That’s the whole trouble with the Bradford situation. I’m sure they would love to have him back, but only at the right price. Anything you say that is overly positive about Sam just feeds ammo to his agent.

It feels like Pederson is settling in to his new job and he’s getting in a comfort zone. That’s good. This is going to be the biggest challenge of his life.


Bradberry is a physical CB. Looks like a good athlete. I haven’t focused on DBs that much this week so I don’t have much in the way of notes on him. Could be a mid-round target.


The Eagles spoke with Sean Davis on Wednesday. He can play CB or S. I actually prefer him at S because he’s smart, can cover, is a good tackler and plays with excellent awareness. I’ll try to talk to him to find out if the Eagles mentioned liking him at one spot or the other.


Here are my Senior Bowl notes from Wednesday.





Joe is on Twitter and if you follow him, which you should, he says some really wild stuff at times. I don’t think he has yet acknowledged ever making a mistake in Philly or Cleveland. He gets very defensive when questioned about anything.

It is possible the Cards mentioned the #5 pick in negotiations, but the fact is that the situation never got to the point where they could actually do the deal so we don’t know if they would have actually gone through with it.

I have serious doubts.

If it is true, and that is possible, this is just another reason to hate that stupid lockout.


554 Comments on “Settling In”

  1. 1 Aaron said at 10:16 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    Im the first to comment

  2. 2 Dave said at 10:18 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    I’m the first to tell you that you forgot an apostrophe in the word I’m;-)

  3. 3 Aaron said at 10:21 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    Im a lazy typer, see did it again

  4. 4 Forthebirds said at 5:19 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    It would have meant something if you actually made a comment.

  5. 5 ChoTime said at 9:03 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Maybe he wouldn’t have been first if he ALSO added punctuation.

  6. 6 TypicalDouche said at 1:55 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Congratulations, you’ve reached the pinnacles of life by being the first to comment.

  7. 7 Forthebirds said at 5:21 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    He keeps his goals low . getting the prize out of the crackerjacks box makes his day.

  8. 8 A_T_G said at 10:23 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    I have an uncanny knack for posting just before the new thread goes up…

    Maybe this will serve only to highlight how little I understand, but
    looking at our personnel, I see safeties that can cover, corners that
    are more strong than fast and a middle linebacker that has impressive
    range. Are we staffed to run a Tampa 2 defense?

  9. 9 A_T_G said at 10:34 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    From D3FB (replied to original version):

    Tampa 2 is dead. Even Lovie and Marinelli only run it sparingly.

    It’s likely going to be a mixture of 43 over and under with some wide 9
    sprinkled in. Coverages will run full gamut from cover 2, cover 3, man
    free, 2 man under. Very little blitzing.

  10. 10 A_T_G said at 10:35 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    Interesting. When I heard Schwartz say attack, I translated that as
    blitz. But the attacking will come from the wide 9 sets and the

  11. 11 D3FB said at 10:47 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    Schwartz blitzes least in the league. He acknowledged it in those two videos tommy linked to last week. But they still led the league in sacks in Buffalo. As far as the “attack” comment, he means he’s going to let slip the dogs of war (front 4) and buy them as much time to get home by mixing coverages. If you want to beat the DL you’re either going to have to consistently get the ball out quickly and try to beat them by death of a thousand paper cuts (long drives are really hard to pull off consistently) or max protect and hope your route combination gets one of your 3 receiving options open against 7 dropping defenders.

    It won’t be a ton of pure wide 9 but the philosophy (DL attacks like hell back 7 makes them right) is the same.

    That’s how it’s drawn up. But I can make a hell of an elevator pitch for running the 33 stack as the base. Fortunately Schwartz has a strong background of translating the whiteboard to results on the field.

  12. 12 A_T_G said at 10:59 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    Great stuff. Thanks. For the uninitiated, it is hard to decipher what is lip service, what is coach speak, and what is a true insight into his vision.

  13. 13 D3FB said at 11:01 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    Here to help.

  14. 14 nicolajNN said at 12:05 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Schwartz and Pederson both said they would scheme to fit the players, how much truth in that remains to be seen, but with someone like Kendricks who’s best attribute might be his blitzing, do you expect Schwartz that to change Schwartz’ approach much, if at all?

  15. 15 Mac said at 1:05 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I’m gonna have to see Kendricks start making actual tackles before I care how he is used by our DC.

  16. 16 D3FB said at 6:16 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    The players he does blitz are the WILL and nickelback.

    Kendricks is more than just a good blitzer. He’s got great range and playmaking ability. He struggles with health and the mental side.

    By playing him at the WILL he won’t have as much OL traffic and will be relatively free to use his range and instincts.

    Yes he had a bad year but he’s not even 26 until the end of September.

  17. 17 Dominik said at 9:31 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    By playing him at the WILL he won’t have as much OL traffic and will be relatively free to use his range and instincts.

    Interesting quote from Kikos agent (quoted from Matt Lombrardo):

    “I can tell you Kiko is very excited about
    playing in this defense. Kiko can play MIKE (middle) and WILL (weak side) in this defense.”

    We’re all pretty sure it will be Hicks at MIKE. I assumed, like you, Kendricks will play Will, because he doesn’t have to cover TEs (size) and he can play more lose (he’s not exactly the smartest LB out there). But he’s fast and very athletic.

    That would have leave Kiko as SAM, at least as the position for him (if he’ll start, we’ll see). I remember you posted a few pics on Twitter, saying Kiko is big enough to play SAM and also saying Schwartz had two very big LB with the Bills so it was pure logic to let him play Will in their Defense.

    But his agent is kind of a good source for which position Kiko may or may not play. Your opinion on that?

  18. 18 D3FB said at 9:48 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    SAMs come off the field in nickel.

    Let’s all now guess why he’s publicly inferring his client will play the other two positions….

    In all reality Kiko probably could play any of the 3 (and if he’s 100% healthy and returns to rookie season form I don’t think it’s impossible he could beat out one of the other two because he’s really talented) but as things stand right now the most logically lineup is with him at SAM.

  19. 19 Dominik said at 11:45 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Funny thing is, you almost answered another question I’d have had (even though it’s OT). What position does Thomas Davis play? Is he the Will or the Sam for the Panthers?

    I would assume, if it’s standard that the Sam comes off the field in nickel, Davis is the Will, because he plays every snap.

    It’s a little bit funny though, that Shaq Thompson therefore is the Sam (according to paper, at least). Not exactly has the body you’d prefer at that position.

    But since the Panthers are in Nickel for 75 percent of the snaps, it doesn’t matter much. Doesn’t matter where Kuechly and Davis play, they will dominante pretty much anyone alone in the middle.

  20. 20 D3FB said at 5:26 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Shaq has only played 33% of snaps this year. I believe they rotate him and AJ Klein. Playing him at SAM is more about getting him ready to take over for Davis to retire

  21. 21 xmbk said at 9:15 AM on January 31st, 2016:

    He’s not a strong SAM, which isn’t to say they can’t scheme to make it work. That would also make for 3 good coverage LB, which would affect nickel usage. Not convinced Barwin won’t see some SAM.

  22. 22 Bacon & Iggles said at 3:14 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Holy hell. You really crushed the crap outta that post. That’s the kind of stuff I love coming to this comment section for, right there.

  23. 23 Stephen E. said at 10:38 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    That would be too bad, as we seem to have an MLB perfect for it (Hicks).

  24. 24 RC5000 said at 10:39 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    As for IDP? Remember that the Schwartz scheme plays zone, which allows short passes to complete, and thus allows cornerbacks to make tackles on pass-catcher; the tackle is the lifeblood of IDP scoring. In 2014, his Bills cornerbacks ranked third as a unit in balanced scoring formats, so look for Eric Rowe and Byron Maxwell to have solid years. His safeties tend to play deep, however, meaning they get less opportunity to make plays on the ball: the 2014 Bills’ safeties were 26th as a unit.

    Linebackers are often in coverage, too, due to Schwartz’s confidence in his four-man rush, which explains his 2014 Bills’ linebackers combining to rank 29th in the league.

    I think it’s better,” Robey said. “Last year, I was more just in coverage basically. Softer coverage, too. I didn’t get to do everything I wanted to do as far as being aggressive and being able to play like I really like to play. This year, Rex allows me to do that.”

  25. 25 A_T_G said at 10:58 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    I wasn’t thinking fantasy at all, but this is interesting stuff.

  26. 26 D3FB said at 11:07 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    As far as the S play, neither Searcy nor Aaron Williams are big ball hawks to begin with.

    Searcy actually put up career best in deflections and INTs and Williams posted career norms that year.

    For perspective on how non ballhawkish they are lets compare some career totals:

    Searcy: 18 Deflections, 6 INT (2011 draft)
    Williams: 31 Deflections, 7 INT (2011 draft)
    Nate Allen: 31 Deflections, 11 INT (2010 draft)
    Jenkins: 63 Deflections, 11 INT (2009 draft)
    Earl: 46 Deflections, 21 INT (2010 draft)
    Coleman: 26 Deflections, 17 INT (2010 draft)
    Rahim Moore: 22 Deflections, 9 INT (2011 draft)

    Jenkins and Williams both spent first few years at CB so deflections are naturally higher.

  27. 27 CrackSammich said at 12:30 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Ultimately, I think it’s not just Tampa 2 that’s dead, but sticking with a defined scheme on defense in general. The wide 9 came out of a need to use the players Schwartz had in a way maximized their ability to do what he wanted–attack, That’s why I think it’s the only label he’s committed to so far. I think in our case, he’ll run whatever front makes that happen, even if we have to stomach the return of the wide 9. But as far as sticking your defense in a base looking and doing it all the time goes, that’s not going to work out too well against good QBs anymore.

  28. 28 eagleyankfan said at 11:51 AM on January 28th, 2016:

    from the previous thread “This seems like a very good hire. ” — I’m not following that logic. He worked in college so its a good hire? He knows how to handle young kids so that qualifies him? I think we can say — he’s paid his dues, he’s earned a shot – so let’s find out.

  29. 29 laeagle said at 12:05 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I think if you look at the players he’s coached and how well he’s done with them (3 top 12 picks, including Cox), it looks like a good hire.

  30. 30 JEinOKC said at 12:24 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I’m concerned about Pederson

    1st – Andy Reid is convinced that Pederson will be an amazing coach, despite inexperience
    2nd – The ownership falls in love with him after an interview
    3rd – Pederson builds a very good staff of coaches. Almost like no one turned him down
    4th – As soon as you see him in Mobile, you are impressed

    Is Doug Pederson Kilgrave?

  31. 31 Ark87 said at 12:43 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    why be concerned? He can compel the opposing QB to throw picks all day. All these years without a superbowl are a perfectly valid justification for turning to super villainy.

  32. 32 JEinOKC said at 1:01 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I stand corrected

  33. 33 Dave said at 1:38 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I think the only thing you have to worry about is that he doesn’t get hit by a bus.

  34. 34 A_T_G said at 12:46 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Yesterday, the D3FB challenge was issued. Today we hear that the Eagles are making progress on filling the open personnel position. Coincidence?

  35. 35 Baloophi said at 1:48 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I can’t. I’m verklempt.

  36. 36 ACViking said at 2:37 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Oy vey iz mir . . . As di bubbe volt gehat beytsim volt zi gevain mayn zaidah.


    If Sam Bradford could play like Tom Brady, he’d be worth every penny of $20 million . . . or something like that.

  37. 37 Nailed It! said at 1:49 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    What was the challenge?

  38. 38 A_T_G said at 2:08 PM on January 28th, 2016:

  39. 39 Nailed It! said at 2:29 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Dammit, I am going to go take a lap.

  40. 40 anon said at 12:58 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    ESPN Eagles reporter Phil Sheridan reports the Eagles could let impending free agent Sam Bradford walk if they believe they can get a “legit quarterback” in the draft.

    “If they’re convinced they can get a legit quarterback in the draft, the Eagles can let Bradford walk in free agency,” Sheridan said. “If not, they can use the franchise tag or negotiate a long-term contract with him in order to keep him.”

  41. 41 RobNE said at 1:13 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    wow this is breaking news. Maybe they will replace him, or maybe not.

  42. 42 Dave said at 1:37 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    In other news, water is wet and the sun is hot.

  43. 43 A_T_G said at 1:17 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    So the Chargers are trying to work out a deal with the Rams to move to L.A. Fans are in limbo as this gets discussed and negotiated.

    But it gets much, much worse. The deal likely wouldn’t go into effect until the 2017 season. In the meantime, the Chargers organization could use that year to play a final season in San Diego and try to leverage city into building them a new stadium so that they stay.

    So the Chargers are either going to be the second new team in two years in L.A., where the novelty will have lost its shine before they get there, or they will be the team that held a city hostage for 18 months and caused a tax increase in a game of chicken that trampled over fans?

    Will there be anyone left rooting for the team in 2017?

  44. 44 Mac said at 1:44 PM on January 28th, 2016:


  45. 45 Sean Stott said at 2:06 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    No chance SD pays for a stadium. Simply no chance.

    As a So. Cal. resident (used to live in PHI) I can confidently say that people here simply don’t care about the NFL besides as a casual sport to watch. UCLA and USC are what people down here root for. It’s weird.

  46. 46 laeagle said at 2:12 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    They’re going to have a hard time supporting one team after the novelty wears off (unless the team is doing really well). Moving the Chargers up basically means the Chargers are moving again within 10 years. There’s no fan base for the Chargers in LA proper. The Rams or Raiders you could make a case for, but Chargers fans are all further south. Leave that team in SD where it belongs.

  47. 47 Baloophi said at 4:50 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    “…and caused a tax increase in a game of chicken that trampled over fans…”

    Are you referring to this guy?

  48. 48 A_T_G said at 5:42 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Looking at the human in the picture, it remained me that too many minutes of my childhood were spent trying to figure out why the Montreal Expos had a cursive, lowercase elb on their hats.

  49. 49 Greg Richards said at 1:31 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Okay, here’s my first pick mock draft. Bad News: All top 3 QBs are gone by pick 12. There is good news though as Ronnie Stanley is still on the board. Rams offer me a 3rd and 4th to move up to 13. I assume it’s for Stanley. I get greedy and take the deal. The Rams go WR instead. Stanley is on board at 15. I quickly swoop him up.

    1-15: Ronnie Stanley, OT, Notre Dame

    From late in the 1st and every pick on I attempt to trade up. My target is Dak Prescott. No one is taking my offers. Eventually Prescott gets taken by the Jets with the 20th pick in the round. I continue throwing out trade offers and eventually get the Colts(drafting at Bengals’ slot from previous trade) to give up the 24th pick in the round and their 5th for my first 3rd and the 3rd I got from STL. With that pick:

    2-24: Cody Whitehair, OG, Kansas State

    By the time, I reach my 3rd round pick(from the Lions) the QBs have been pretty well depleted. I focus on other positions. I take a guy the Eagles are known to be looking at:

    3-79: Carl Nassib, DE, Penn State

    Can never have too many pass-rushers.

    In the 4th round, I take S Karl Joseph. Safety is pretty thin this year and he was the last good safety really left. I also grab Kyler Fackrell of Utah State. Not 100% sure where he fits. I’ll start him out at SLB.

    4-12: Karl Joseph, S, West Virginia
    4-15: Kyler Fackrell, OLB/DE, Utah State

    Still no QBs I like in Round 5. Instead, I take a speed WR in Roger Lewis out of Bowling Green, a good value at CB in Maurice Canady, and DT depth(deep class this year) in Maliek Collins of Nebraska.

    5-14: Roger Lewis, WR, Bowling Green
    5-16: Maurice Candady, CB, Virginia
    5-23: Maliek Collins, DT, Nebraska

    I finally get my QB in Round 6, although I wouldn’t expect him to be our eventual starter.

    6-13: Brandon Doughty, QB, Western Kentucky

    In Rd 7, I grab another WR and a RB.

    7-12: Kolby Listenbee, WR, Texas Christian

    7-30: DeAndre Washington, RB, Texas Tech

    The way this fell, it’s time to look at what QBs are eligible for the 2017 draft.

  50. 50 ACViking said at 2:40 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    So where did the QBs go?

  51. 51 Bert's Bells said at 5:03 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    They went to Betsons

  52. 52 Media Mike said at 4:41 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I generally dig it, but why were you trying so hard to move up and get an H-back like Prescott? I think we need a QB.

  53. 53 b3nz0z said at 5:38 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    shocked nassib was there when he was

  54. 54 D3FB said at 5:59 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Nassib is a shitty prospect. He shouldn’t even go that high.

  55. 55 bubqr said at 3:20 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Late to the party but I loved, LOVED the Schwartz videos. Among everything he said, that last bit on how setting the edge hard (through the use of the wide 9) diminished the amount of plays going outside and therefore increased the “traffic” to the inside where Haynesworth (and then Suh, Kyle Williamls, Marcell Dareus) could wreak havocwere bodes well for the impact Cox could have in this defense. I wanted him badly, and can’t wait to see him coach our defense.

  56. 56 RC5000 said at 3:27 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Ed Bouchette ‏@EdBouchette 24m24 minutes ago

    Rooney said Eagles have received permission to interview Brandon Hunt, Steelers pro scout coord, for their director of player personnel.

  57. 57 Greg Richards said at 4:11 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    He’s the equivalent of PIT’s director of pro personnel. Some call that guy “coordinator”. For other teams, like the Eagles, the coordinator title is usually given to a lower-level personnel type below a scout who does things like arranging travel, scheduling visits and other administrative tasks.

  58. 58 Media Mike said at 4:40 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I’m not sure I want a pro personnel guy from Pittsburgh, I want their head of the college side. They’re a draft team, not a free agent one.

  59. 59 Media Mike said at 4:47 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Yeah, the guy I want from Pittsburgh would be Phil Kreidler, their college scouting coordinator. We need draft assistance in terms of spotting talent, not a pro personnel guy.

  60. 60 Greg Richards said at 5:14 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    For some reason, it seems like teams more often want pro scouting directors as GMs/director of player personnel than college scouting directors. Not sure why that is. I recall Dan Hatman, former Eagles’ pro scout, explaining why that was on twitter but I don’t recall the details. I don’t think it matters anyway. It’s doubtful that a team is going to let it’s college scouting director leave right now.

  61. 61 RC5000 said at 5:30 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Because they often are more involved in salary cap management ?

  62. 62 Greg Richards said at 6:07 PM on January 28th, 2016:


  63. 63 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:27 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Both Pederson and HOwie are making mistakes IMO with their public Pro Bradford comments. Shut your mouth and stop discussing guys we don’t have under contract..
    Pederson is new, mistake is understandable, but Roseman knows better so his mistake is worse especially when he knew better, proof by refusing to publically acknowledge or answer questions about the Curry and Cox extensions he was asked about
    Hardly the end of the world, none the less its a mistake a seasoned negotiator like Roseman SHOULDNT be making.

  64. 64 Mac said at 3:32 PM on January 28th, 2016:


  65. 65 Fufina said at 3:37 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I think they have no idea what they are going to do about Bradford, and won’t choose until the last possible minute so they can gather as much draft information as possible (not just on the player but how the league evaluates guys).

    Once they have done that they will move one direction or another on Bradford, but even then the will probably consider letting the market set itself. There are only 2-3 teams including Eagles who are going to be interested in paying anything like what he is looking for, and if neither of those want to go that direction then you could get Bradford on a 1 year $10mil or something deal as a prove it.

  66. 66 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:39 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Nah… Me thinks they decide before he hits the open market

  67. 67 Sean Stott said at 5:10 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I think they want to get all of the contracts done and then see where they stand.

  68. 68 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:20 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Sounds about right,., not just getting guys extend, I expect a lot of contract gymnastics by HOwie, altering existing contracts to free up more cap space than people think… We don’t even know how much the cap will improve

  69. 69 ChoTime said at 8:59 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    That’s kind of frightening. I liked the Eagles better when they knew what they were doing. Actually, I am most afraid of them signing the dude to $20M, and him either continuing to suck or get injured.

  70. 70 ACViking said at 4:30 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    You’re totally missing the point of Roseman’s comments.

    Roseman isn’t some fan off the street negotiating with a high-profile player for the first time.

    Roseman’s comments are to make a negotiating point with Bradford and his agent.

    Which is exactly why Roseman is saying nothing about Cox and Curry. No reason.

    Could not be more obvious what’s happening.

  71. 71 b3nz0z said at 5:37 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    pretend i’m dumb and explain what you mean here. i like it, i just don’t follow.

  72. 72 ACViking said at 6:55 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Roseman, in effect, is negotiating publicly with Bradford and his agent Tom Condon. Who’s probably doing the same thing.

    I’m assuming that some preliminary talks have occurred. Polite, friendly exchanges about how each side is interested in the other if the numbers can be made to work. And some numbers maybe have been exchanged.

    So — by way of example — in response to what’s been said by each side:

    1. Someone leaks Bradford asked for $25 million — a ridiculous number, clearly, which by making it public, tells Bradford he will have to lower his expectations a lot.

    2. Someone leaks that Bradford will probably wait on any deal until after FA starts so he can shop around — a message to Roseman that Bradford’s not offering any home-town discount.

    3. Roseman says Bradford’s talented — signal that the Eagles are willing to negotiate now.

    4. Roseman says Bradford may not be back — message to Condon that his numbers are too high.

  73. 73 Anders said at 7:06 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Isn’t it pretty much how some attorneys do some of the large battles? Condon versus Howie is two of the best against each other, will be interesting to see where it ends

  74. 74 ACViking said at 7:11 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    High profile civil lawsuits. High profile criminal cases.

    If the judge doesn’t enter a gag order, both sides will usually leak.

    All the way until a jury verdict or agreed resolution.

  75. 75 Joe Minx said at 5:41 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Yep. This is the one area where I trust Howie knows what he’s doing.

  76. 76 D3FB said at 5:56 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Everything that has been said of Bradford sings “we like him we don’t love him”

    The only question is who the intended audience is: Condon (FOH with these demands) or other teams(he’s not walking for nothing make me an offer)?

  77. 77 DanJ3645 said at 6:51 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Agree it’s also to help any tag and trade discussions

  78. 78 GermanEagle said at 3:40 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I don’t think he [Joe Banner] has yet acknowledged ever making a mistake in Philly or Cleveland

    Oh yes he has! He admitted multiple times on twitter his big mistake re Brian Dawkins which he whole-heartedly still regrets until today.

    I like Joe. Wish he’d come back to replace Howie.

  79. 79 Dave said at 3:55 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Three years after Howie leaves and he is unemployed but active on Twitter, I’ll be waiting for posts like this…I like Howie. Wish he’d come back to replace (name future GM here).

  80. 80 GermanEagle said at 4:05 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Joe Banner was a great GM. Not flawless, but the Eagles have been very competitive constantly over his years.

  81. 81 Tumtum said at 4:52 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Only he was never the GM.

  82. 82 Dave said at 5:01 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    That’s why he was good at it. Nobody remembers his bad draft picks because he never made any. He gets credit for the things Modrak and Heckert did.

    Joe’s job was to convince the politicians to give Lurie several hundred million dollars of tax money so Lurie could build a stadium. Outside of that, he was a salary cap specialist. Joe made it clear on Twitter that getting the stadium built was his greatest accomplishment.

  83. 83 Anders said at 7:03 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    He also made the NFL have the chance for teams to move cap over because he was the only one to smartly abuse the old rules

  84. 84 GermanEagle said at 6:06 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    You know what I meant.

  85. 85 GermanEagle said at 7:13 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I was comparing him to Howie. Can you tell me what Howie is exactly? Exactly!

  86. 86 Fufina said at 4:10 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    He has said ‘for what it is worth’ on twitter, he has had offers and does not want to commit the kind of time to run a team at his age. Think he will take a very generous adviser role to an owner but that is about it.

  87. 87 Dave said at 4:55 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I don’t believe he has had offers to run a team as President or GM. Im sure he was offered salary cap/contractbadvisory roles, but definitely nit to run a team. He got fired unexpectantly and was shell-shocked.

  88. 88 daveH said at 6:54 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Can he manage a timeclock ?

  89. 89 D3FB said at 5:53 AM on January 29th, 2016:


  90. 90 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:47 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Lol @ jerry Jones saying they don’t NEED to draft a QB because they will have Romo for another 3,4 or 5 years…. I pray this maniac actually means this nonsense. Be awesome to see Dallas pass on a QB in the draft because they think RG3 or Manziel will save them if Romo gets injured… don’t ever die jerry, philly loves you!!
    At least they smartened up and wI’ll let Hardy walk

  91. 91 Will:↑↑↓↓←→←→BA said at 3:51 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I think his son is going to save the Cowboys from Jerry again this draft

  92. 92 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:02 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Hopefully his “son saving them” will mean thinking that waiting Til round two to draft Cardale will “save” them

  93. 93 Will:↑↑↓↓←→←→BA said at 4:52 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Thats a Jerry move

  94. 94 Insomniac said at 4:31 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I hope he doesn’t. Stephen Jones looks like he’s an actual competent GM.

  95. 95 RC5000 said at 3:57 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Well if they take Wentz that could continue the way Wentz has developed at QB his whole life. Imagine if he sat for 2 years, he’d have about 2 1/2 total seasons of game experience between high school and college at QB at age 25 if Romo stayed healthy.

  96. 96 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:53 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Sproles said chip had him running inside too much. He wants to run outside and on screens.. He said we need to cater our offense to the RB a strengths this year.
    But Sproles dropped a BOMB! They need a two RB rotation, and if it’s a 3 RB rotation like last year, playërs won’t be happy…. Yikes..
    Can we trade Ryan Mathews contract? Doubt Murray can be traded

  97. 97 Dave said at 3:59 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I think he meant to say, DeMarco won’t be happy.

  98. 98 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:00 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Yeah right, cuz im sure Sproles was thrilled with 6-8 touches per game
    I doubt any of our RB were happy last year

  99. 99 Dave said at 6:26 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I think you’re wrong about Sproles. He had the 2nd most touches of his entire 11 year career last year (rushing and receiving). He was definitely referring to Murray.

  100. 100 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:30 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    if Sproles just spelled it out that he hopes we start using the RB better and that he didn’t think running inside was the best use of his talent, to me it sounds like he is speaking for himself, especially since Most smart NFL veterans will Never speak for another teammate. You can’t even get Trent Cole to complimemt another teammate because that’s a No No with a lot of veterans.. Maybe they can speak about a young player they are trying to help develope, but I would be surprised if Sproles was talking about another respected veteran like Murray. Unwritten rules, just like you don’t talk about a teammates contract unless you are congratulating him… But I guess it’s open to interpretation

  101. 101 RC5000 said at 4:02 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Why would you trade Mathews when he has too much dead money? You’re going to have to replace him. You need depth in this league and there’s probably going to be 3 RBs anyway.

  102. 102 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:03 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I didnt say I want to trade Mahews, I asked CAN WE TRADE Mathews? Which implies that I don’t know shit about his contract

  103. 103 RC5000 said at 4:09 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I didn’t say you did or didn’t. That was a rhetorical question. You means Eagles or anyone.

  104. 104 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:10 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    No, I meant I already know Murrays contract is too fucked up to trade now. Is Mathews contract easier to trade? Or is SPROLES the most fiscally responsible contract to move at this point? Keeping all 3 sounds like a Terrible idea for multiple reasons

  105. 105 RC5000 said at 4:22 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    It would be silly to trade Mathews with 4 mill cap hit and 3 mill dead money. He obviously would be easier to trade than Murray, he’s way cheaper. Yes Sproles is most fiscally responsible contract to move at this point.

  106. 106 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:15 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Not really, I assume it’s cheaper than Murray… So we take a 7mil cap hit, convert 7 mil of MURRAYS salary to a signing bonus, or use some other contract gymnastics to free up the same amount to offset the financial burden of getting out of one of the silly RB contracts chip saddled us with

  107. 107 daveH said at 6:52 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Who didnt say who said what and was what he didnt say rhetorical ?

  108. 108 MagSaysWHAAT? said at 7:02 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    It doesn’t matter if a player has been here for 5 years or 5 minutes. The real ones ALL think they should be playing.

  109. 109 Greg Richards said at 4:09 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I think Sproles is the most likely of the 3 RBs to go, just due to age and cap considerations.

  110. 110 GermanEagle said at 4:17 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I don’t think the Eagles would be wise to get rid of one of the best Punt Returners in this league. Even at his current salary.

  111. 111 TypicalDouche said at 4:34 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Well in the event that one of the 3 RBs would need to be cut it would absolutely be Sproles.

  112. 112 GermanEagle said at 4:36 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Let’s see if the Eagles can afford to keep investing so much $$$ in the RB position.

  113. 113 TypicalDouche said at 4:43 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Did you not read my post correctly? In the event that one of the 3 RBs “needs to be cut” it would be Sproles. So that is the event.

  114. 114 TypicalDouche said at 4:51 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I wish they can get off the books with Murray but that wont happen until next year. After that they can start from scratch with a rookie runner.

  115. 115 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:13 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    If it was financially possible, I would cut all 3 backs today, and grab Zeke Elliot and run him into the ground on some cheap China sweatshop level pay for the next 5 years, get his backüp in round 5 and pay him in circus Peanuts, save a ton, and dump every penny into the OL
    Two rookies and Kenjon Barner as our 3rd down back..
    I can’t wait to get back to this type of stable of RB instead of chips insanity of paying a ton for such a devalued position. RB can’t make an OL (unless it’s Barry), OL can make RBs, ask Demarco.

  116. 116 Media Mike said at 6:15 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    “Two rookies and Kenjon Barner as our 3rd down back.”

    Um, NO! No Barner.

  117. 117 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:16 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I agree. I don’t want that duck here either, I meant for a year Til we can get another Cheap RB in the draft, since I assume drafting 3 RBs this year would be a stretch

  118. 118 Media Mike said at 6:17 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Not even for that long

  119. 119 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:18 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Lol I knew you would say that… MOSTERT! MOSTERT! MOSTERT!

  120. 120 anon said at 6:39 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Call Josey! Or Mostert

  121. 121 Media Mike said at 6:40 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Or Tucker if he’s healed.

  122. 122 A_T_G said at 9:22 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Or? Why or?

  123. 123 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:36 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Plus Sproles brings a different dynamic than the other two so I would rather keep SProles, especially under Doug who should have all kinds of great ways we used westbrook and they used Jamaal Charles to throw to Sproles..
    Cut Ryan or Murray whichever is less of cap hit. If cutting one costs 5mil, then take 5mil off the contract of the remaing RB and convert it to a signing bonus or some other contract gymnastics that Roseman has in his arsenal and alter the contract of the other RB to free up the same amount that it costs to cut the other RB and offset the added cap hit we took getting rid of mathews or murray

  124. 124 anon said at 5:40 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    you should look at DAT’s stats over the last two years…

  125. 125 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:24 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Sorry, I’m imposing a Duck ban… No new ducks Til at least 2020, unless something crazy happens and Deforest falls to #13 of course

  126. 126 Media Mike said at 6:30 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    We can only have more Ducks 2 year ago?

  127. 127 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:32 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Lol changed it, I wish, that would mean no Huff, No Hart, No Kiko.. But we would still be stuck with Jeff Maehl

  128. 128 anon said at 6:36 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I’m saying look how unproductive DAT has been in Andy/Pederson’s offense. That offense until this year was Jamaal Charles doing EVERYTHING. Probably the only reason Mac got stats this year is because Charles was hurt. Offense was totally unimaginative outside of him and maybe Kelce depending on the day.

  129. 129 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:32 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    What’s that mean? Just because you have good ways to get CHarles or Sproles, doesn’t mean Doug has to call those Playes to Sproles every time… I care about the play design, not how many times knucklhead andy Reid called the plays for CHarles.
    Happy to have some of those play calls if we keep sproles, DOESNT mean I want Pederson to call those plays 40 times a game

  130. 130 P_P_K said at 4:17 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    “Sproles said chip had him running inside too much. He wants to run outside and on screens.”

    How many times did I yell the same thing?

  131. 131 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:32 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I think everyone who has ever seen a football game besides chip yelled the same thing… Lol chip ran SProles inside and ran Murray outside, sigh… Thin line between genius and insanity..

  132. 132 anon said at 5:42 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Sproles was at times our best inside running, can hid between lineman and slip through the holes that Demarco / Ryan couldn’t fit through. Can’t be a screen or wheel route every time — plus sproles’ hands were questionable at times.

  133. 133 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:02 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Sproles is good in plenty of ways. He never said he sucked running inside, he saying that there are better ways to maximize his talent, and I wouldn’t presume to think I know better than Sproles does.. But you are welcome to disagree with him… Just because something worked good, doesn’t mean that was the BEST way… Im sure no matter how you used SProles would be a good option, he just seems to think it wasn’t the best option.
    It’s not like he is some underachiever trying to make an excuse for poor play. philly Loves Sproles, if he thinks he can be used better, I have no reason not to believe him, especially with his past history under Sean Peyton who turned him into a quasi westbrook

  134. 134 Insomniac said at 4:30 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Lol Sproles would be cut so fast if he said this to Chip.

  135. 135 Media Mike said at 4:38 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Sounds like Sproles is angling for a B-West type role and usage in his contract year.

  136. 136 anon said at 5:57 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    his “retirement year”

  137. 137 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:57 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Good, THATS whats best for us… Id love to see what he can do with some of the Westbrook or Jamaal Charles Playbooks in the passing game..

  138. 138 Tumtum said at 4:50 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Lil fella was great inside. I don’t care if he didn’t like it.

  139. 139 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:56 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Sure, but if he only got 4 carries and 3 were inside, I could see why someone who has been even better used in other ways wouldnt be thrilled about it… Then again, if he were running inside behind the 2013 OL he may have found it more enjoyable..
    Sproles is a great player, he is going to be good in more than one way. I would never say he was bad at running inside, but history of his career says that there are better ways to maximize his ability

  140. 140 b3nz0z said at 5:35 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    so chip wouldn’t run the inside guy inside and wouldn’t run the outside guy outside. icwt

  141. 141 A_T_G said at 5:51 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    If you are forcing the issue, I am cutting the guy that is using the media to try to coerce the new leadership.

    Ryan Mathews is the best of the trio.

  142. 142 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:53 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Actually I don’t really care who they cut, hopefully all 3 will be gone by next year

  143. 143 Tumtum said at 4:35 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Never really been a press conference watcher, and could really care less how our coach does in them. In the few I did watch of Chip, he never really struck me as a guy I like. Just watching him my read was always “Smart guy. Always thinks he is the smartest guy in the room, rarely is”.

    Don’t have a read on Dougy P yet, but I can tell you Schwartz is a guy I would love to get a beer with.

  144. 144 Fufina said at 4:41 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Watch his one to one interviews and he comes of as charismatic and grounded guy who loves football. In an formal press interview he is pretty awful honestly. Think it will improve but will take time.

  145. 145 anon said at 4:45 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    when he knew he was fired after the Detroit game and also after the Pats game i thought those were good PCs.

  146. 146 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:52 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    most people seem to want to trade back this year for more picks, Normally (the last two drafts) I would have agreed but this year trading back is a no no for me..
    Most draft classes really only have 15-20 kids with first round grades. so the last two years picking in the 20s, it made sense to trade back instead of just spending a first round pick on a kid we had a second round grade on. but this year is the first chance since we picked 4th in 2013 that we should be able to get a legit first round taleng (picking #13). Looking at building the team over the next two years, there aren’t many positions we are so set at that we should scoff at adding a first round talent.. If we can add a legit first round Talent, stay put and make the pick…. If you have like 20 kids with a first round great and you can trade back and still get a legit first round prospect, THATS fine, but we have 9 picks in this draft, Id prefer going with quality over quantity earlier, even if it’s at a position like ILB, WR, CB… A first round corner today, allows us to axe the expensive Maxwell contract tomorrow… There really aren’t many positions besides like Center, RB, and TE where it would be a real waste to add a top young talent

  147. 147 anon said at 5:58 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Agree, when does stacking picks work. Much rather have 1 Cox than 2 mediocre players.

  148. 148 Dave said at 6:20 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Or as many on here have said, 2 mediocre QBs rather than Sam Bradford.

  149. 149 Mac said at 6:22 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Stacking picks works when you get future picks in the trade. Gives you mobility next year… also later round picks are like lottery tickets, you need more tickets to find a few gems. And having more picks gives the team upward mobility either in this draft or a future draft.

  150. 150 A_T_G said at 9:21 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    How about one Marcus Smith or two Jordan Mathews? One Nelson Agholor or a pair of Jordan Hicks?

    I bet if you listed the best 20 players recently drafted, only 3 were first rounders.

  151. 151 kajomo said at 6:22 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Maybe I missed it , but I havent seen many people, if any, say they want to trade back. Most peopke either want ti draft a QB or add an elite player around Sam.

  152. 152 Media Mike said at 6:29 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I have certain guys who I’d take at 13. If they’re not there, I’d like a trade down.

  153. 153 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:52 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Same, anyone with a first round gradewho can help us is who I would want…If those players aren’t available, who wouldn’t want to trade back… An even better scenario is being able to move back like 3 spots if a team wants to leap the Rams for a QB and still get a kid who is legitimately 1st round worthy…
    Im hoping it will be a while before we pick this high again, I’d like to make it count … If 3 QBs end up going in the top 13, we get our pick at one of the 10 best players at all the non QB positions, if we can’t make THAT count, shame on us… Should be able to get a baller this year

  154. 154 Media Mike said at 6:54 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I don’t know if I like anybody at 13 enough yet.

  155. 155 kajomo said at 7:15 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    My short list pre-combine

    Carson Wentz (depending on Bradford)
    Mackensie Alexander
    Laquon Treadwell
    Eli Apple

  156. 156 Media Mike said at 7:23 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I’m afraid Wentz won’t be there at 13. Treadwell would be a great player. Not sure if either corner at 13 would play well enough. Seems like some of the rd 1 corners the last 5 years have been slow to contribute.

  157. 157 kajomo said at 9:27 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    That’s why I’d draft one now. We can be patient with a corner for a year or two until we are in position to really compete

  158. 158 anon said at 2:51 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I think we’ll be really competitive next year.

  159. 159 D3FB said at 5:49 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Benjamin Albright is hearing Goff is gonna take a Teddy tumble.

    Please dear god.

  160. 160 Ryan Rambo said at 9:52 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    If the qb’s go early could that push a surprise player our way?

  161. 161 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:28 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    What? Is this draft Class THAT BAD that you WOULDNT jump at the chance to add one of the top 10 non QB prospects in this draft class?
    Can this draft class be THAT pathetic that there aren’t 13 legit round one talents? Id rather just draft the injured LB from Notre Dame instead of handing out 1st round contracts to second round talents

  162. 162 ACViking said at 6:38 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    facts are useless against a narrative

  163. 163 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:46 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Haven’t seen many people posting their draft games staying at #13, and without a 2nd round pick, many seem to want to move back and recoup that 2nd, if you HAVENT seen it, you haven’t looked hard enough…sounds like a personal problem to me

  164. 164 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:04 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Out of QBs picked in the 6-20 range, only 5 of 32 QBs have made at least one pro bowl…
    Those are the odds we would be looking at taking a QB at #13.. You must trust HOwie more than I do lol

  165. 165 ACViking said at 6:29 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Two points.

    QBs drafted among the top five of Rd 1 have won 12 of the last 35 SBs.

    QBs drafted in Rd 1 outside of the top five have won 7 of the last 35 SBs.

    QBs drafted in Rds 2, 3, 6, 9 or was a FA have won 16 of the last 35 SBs

    Moreover . . . the lower you go in Rd 1 at any position, the fewer Pro Bowl appearances you’ll find.

  166. 166 anon said at 6:33 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Problem is it’s same people making it to the superbowl every year basically. Manning, Brady Wilson the last like 10 yrs it seems

  167. 167 ACViking said at 6:34 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Same with Pro Bowls.

    If you play on a talented team, you’ll look a whole lot better.

    Confirms the fallacy of statistics in this kind of discussion — where the sample size is so small.

  168. 168 Fufina said at 6:31 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    And? I mean i could question your sampling range but even if we assume we have a 1/6 chance on hitting on a Probowl grade QB that is probably worth it. Think the general chances for 1st rounders to turn into probowlers is about 1/3, so its twice as bad… and at the QB position you take that as a 1 probowl QB is worth 2 probowlers at another spot.

  169. 169 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:48 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Making the pro bowl ISNT even a great accomplishment. Everyone makes the ProBowl. There were like 137 players named to the pro bowl this yeàr lol. Probably a lot more QBs that made the ProBowl fhan QBs who made the Super Bowl. So wouldnt that make the stat even scarier?

  170. 170 Fufina said at 6:53 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Not really because i think people struggle to quantify how hard it is to win a Super Bowl, and the best way to do that is with an elite QB, which is hard to find so keep trying until you do.

  171. 171 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:56 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Opportunity cost, unless we want to continue operating like chip kelly did and pretend value doesn’t matter… You absolutely LOVE a QB available, then there isn’t anything to talk about.. You only LIKE a QB available that high, then I’d rather punt and Improve my team adding a player I love with a top 13 pick
    I don’t believe in the throw dog shit against the wall, and hope something sticks method, especially at QB, and especially with a top 15 pick

  172. 172 Fufina said at 7:05 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    QB’s are an entirely different market with different values. Average QB’s can get get 1st round pick value and mega contracts. Most top QB’s are hugely underpaid (to their relative value currently) to help their teams win.

    If you have a QB that you think has a chance to be great you draft him as soon as you can if you have a need. ‘Value’ does not matter.

  173. 173 Media Mike said at 6:58 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    The tantalizing thing is that we’ve seen Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, and Eli Manning win titles so we can rationalize trying to do it with guys clearly less talented than Brady, Big Ben, Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, Flacco, and Wilson.

    But I agree that we need to keep taking shots at QB until we get one good enough.

  174. 174 ACViking said at 6:32 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Pro Bowl appearances . . . .

    This season, 11 QBs have been asked (begged) to play in the Pro Bowl.

    None are named Sam Bradford.

    What’s that say about how other coaches and players perceive him?

  175. 175 anon said at 6:33 PM on January 28th, 2016:


  176. 176 MS said at 6:34 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Absolutely nothing at all.

  177. 177 ACViking said at 6:36 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Bradford was so low in the voting because of his reputation?

    Tyrod Taylor found his way to Hawaii.

  178. 178 MS said at 6:44 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I usually appreciate your insight but for me, other than crisism of the probowl as a whole, the Grand total of intelligent conclusions that can be drawn from the probowl = Eagles superbowl victories. Period.

  179. 179 ACViking said at 7:08 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    MS . . .

    Agree about the Pro Bowl generally. A vehicle that’s outlived its usefulness.

    Regarding Bradford, I’m just struck at how — once you get past the usual Pro Bowl QB suspects — he finished so low (outside the top 11) in the voting by players and coaches.

  180. 180 anon said at 7:12 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Why? Jenkins was 7th alternate and PFFs highest rated S. Thurmond was also rated really high ad not even close to PB.

  181. 181 ACViking said at 7:13 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Every team has 2 safeties. 7th out of 64, then?

  182. 182 ACViking said at 7:14 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Was Jenkins the “7th Alternate” — meaning 6 of 12 safeties chosen ahead of him bowed out (making Jenkins 13th)?

    Or was he the 7th safety selected?

  183. 183 TypicalDouche said at 7:17 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    If I am not mistaken buddy I believe that after the initial balloting was complete that Jenkins was the 12th safety selected to the pro bowl. I could be wrong as I did no research on that but I think that’s how it went.

  184. 184 ACViking said at 7:19 PM on January 28th, 2016:


    Okay. 12th out of 64, then?

    Better than 12th out of 32.

    By the way, who exactly besides Earl Thomas and Eric Berry were among the 12 safeties selected ahead of Jenkins?

    I wonder what the coaches and players are seeing?

  185. 185 TypicalDouche said at 7:24 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I believe Harrison Smith, Rashed Jones, McCourtey, Woodson, Chancellor, Ward, Kurt F’n Coleman are just a few that I vaguely remember being selected ahead of Jenkins which is downright ludicrous. (Again don’t quote me on that safety list)

  186. 186 ACViking said at 7:28 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    . . . Kurt F’n Coleman . . .

    Maybe the best argument for disbanding the Pro Bowl?

  187. 187 ACViking said at 7:28 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    TD —

    That Kurt Coleman description was just great. Excellent.

  188. 188 TypicalDouche said at 7:38 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I literally laughed out loud while typing that Kurt Coleman was selected to the Pro Bowl. I am still in disbelief about it.

  189. 189 ACViking said at 7:39 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    LMAO . . . would have loved to hear you say that after sharing a pitcher of Newcastle

  190. 190 TypicalDouche said at 7:45 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    lol Oh boy after enjoying some Newcastle I think it would have been more of yelling excessively loud and definitely more profanities when referring to Coleman.

  191. 191 ACViking said at 7:20 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    thanks, also

  192. 192 anon said at 7:17 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    The former

  193. 193 ACViking said at 7:20 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    got it. thx for clarifying

  194. 194 MS said at 7:22 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    I hear you, but do those players and coaches put careful analysis into their selections? Is there any incentive for them to? I think not. Horrible source of scientific data, and worthless to read into for me.

  195. 195 ACViking said at 7:27 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    MS —

    Fair and persuasive.

    See your point. And it’s a good one.

  196. 196 ChoTime said at 8:53 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Interesting to see the camps digging in on this issue, each marshaling its own exclusive set of evidences and arguments. For some, their journey has been documented here in the comment section; others seemed to arrive at their decision without warning. At some point, discussion is incapable of changing minds and becomes more of a proving ground where proponents of each side joust and jockey. There must be a group of independents who are undecided; perhaps they follow the back and forth in hopes of having their opinions swayed (but these are silent).

    I am anti-Bradford, weakly because of reason and strongly because of bias/gut feeling. However, I will be pleased if the 27th or whatever alternate to the Pro Bowl is on another team. Another fun trajectory to follow will be that initiated by Sam’s new contract or lack of the same.

  197. 197 FairOaks said at 1:17 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Well the pro bowl is based on the entire season and Bradford was pretty bad for half of it. That and the nfc east did not have a sterling reputation this year.

    A full year playing like he did at the end (and making the playoffs) probably would change things.

  198. 198 MS said at 7:29 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Who had the worse offense and ol this year? Bradford had crap I’m front of him. So judging off production, which Taylor is the clear winner for this year, no doubt. But that doesn’t have implications for what the birds should do with qb next year.

  199. 199 ACViking said at 7:37 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    MS . . .

    This stream of comments was prompted by someone saying something about how only QBs drafted in the Top 5 make most of the Pro Bowls.

    So I pointed out that the Eagles have a QB selected first overall . . . and he’s way down on the PB list this year.

    If you’re saying that Pro Bowl appearances shouldn’t matter . . . I wholly agree.

    Proves nothing.

  200. 200 GermanEagle said at 7:36 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    In the (twisted words) of Jim Mora Sr and Allen Iverson:

    “Pro Bowl…Pro Bowl…we’re talking about the Pro Bowl?!”

  201. 201 ACViking said at 7:38 PM on January 28th, 2016:


    that rant by Mora has a “Godfather”-like quality.

    you can always find situations where Mora’s insanity fits — like lines from the Godfather fit so many situations.

  202. 202 GermanEagle said at 7:42 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Mora. Dennis Green. Iverson.

    My personal top 3 in terms of press conferences. Only former TO’s agent Mr. ‘next comment’ can top that!

  203. 203 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:17 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Chip kelly ISNT even at the senior Bowl this week..LOL Baalke left him at home

  204. 204 anon said at 6:31 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    How the might y have fallen. I’d love to see Chip’s face when he sees howie scouting players.

  205. 205 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:35 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    First he is forced to hire a shaky DC who’s cleveland defense fell apart, which was like his 37th choice of DC, now he isn’t even at the pro bowl scouting talent?… Curious to see who the Niners pick in round 1..
    Chip is crazy, would anyone be surprised if he gets rid of KAp, DOESNT draft a QB in the top 10, and wants to proceed with Blaine Gabbert? It would be the greatest thing ever

  206. 206 anon said at 6:38 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    would be, but i’d almost be surprised if he was in the draft room.

  207. 207 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:57 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    True dat…

  208. 208 MagSaysWHAAT? said at 6:55 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    It would be Baalke not drafting a QB, remember? He is, after all, totally in charge, isn’t he?

  209. 209 MagSaysWHAAT? said at 6:50 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    “(Pederson) was near a chain link fence at football practice.”
    Easy to climb when ready to escape.

    Also it doesn’t matter how good P Squared is. In 2014,, when he discovered he was diabetic and had to go through the whole diet/insulin adjustment routine, he didn’t play so well. He would have been torn to shreds here and on other boards.

  210. 210 John Galt said at 7:55 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Nah, our crack sports science department would have sniffed that out and avoided the whole issue.

  211. 211 ChoTime said at 8:42 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Sniffed crack, wha?

  212. 212 CrackSammich said at 10:53 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    I did no such thing.

  213. 213 Fufina said at 7:02 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Again think people misunderstand how hard it is to win the Super Bowl.

    In the last 30 years only 15 teams have won it out of 32 (ok there was some expansions in there but general point stands).

    Know what nearly all of them had? Great QB’s.

    Eagles are in a mess because they have not prioritised drafting a QB since McNabb, we have tried to go with a range of retread QB’s, non 1st round drafted QB’s and have got no where close to being a contending team.

    Failing on 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 QB’s really does not matter big picture because once you have your guy you can actually have a decent chance of contending. Until then you are on the outside looking in.

  214. 214 anon said at 7:13 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Most of them (recently) had better defenses than they had Qbs.

  215. 215 Fufina said at 7:44 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Tom Brady, Russell Wilson, Joe Flacco, Eli Manning, Aaron Rogers, Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger, Payton Manning.

    Last QB to be carried to the Super Bowl was Ben in 2005. Flacco was on fire in 2012 and carried his team, and Eli the same in 2011.

    yes most had good defenses as well. But they all had great QB’s.

  216. 216 Media Mike said at 7:49 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Both Giants wins were led by the D. Lucky completions for Eli and bad drops by the Patriots carried the day both times.

    Eli doesn’t belong on your list.

  217. 217 Fufina said at 7:51 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    He did not have great Super Bowl games, but he had great post seasons, and he has shown in the right situation he can win games. Sure he not a top 5 QB – but he has generally been in the top 10 discussion since 2007.

  218. 218 Media Mike said at 7:54 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    On the fringes of the top 10 at best. And most years not in it.

  219. 219 botto said at 7:55 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    dats right

  220. 220 anon said at 8:08 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Flacco a great QB, what’s he done since that SB win? He’s trying to give all his $ back so he can get better players on his team.

  221. 221 Will:↑↑↓↓←→←→BA said at 8:14 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Manning was carried this year. And Wilson the last 2 years.

  222. 222 bill said at 8:55 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    The Seahawks don’t win the SB without a dominant D and STs performance against the Saints. Or do you think 9/18 103 0 TDs and 67.6 rating is what won that game? The Hawks had a 13-0 lead with Wilson’s line reading 5/6 28. He’s had games like that each of the last three seasons. People *seriously* overrate how responsible Wilson is for his team’s playoff success. That defense carried Wilson more often through the playoffs than the other way around.

  223. 223 anon said at 8:56 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    This year when D was less good but RW was playing out of his mind at the end of the year. Almost lost first game, trashed in game 2.

  224. 224 bill said at 9:07 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Give him a pass for the Vikings game, because of the conditions, but you certainly can’t argue that he dragged that team to victory (they really should have lost in any event). But he was absolutely awful in non-garbage time against the Panthers. A big part of the loss.

  225. 225 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:24 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Rex grossman was carried by Bears defense

  226. 226 BlindChow said at 7:14 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    A lot of teams have “prioritized” drafting a QB in the 1st round. Some of those names include Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, Blaine Gabbert, EJ Manuel…

  227. 227 anon said at 7:16 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    John $$

  228. 228 ACViking said at 7:17 PM on January 28th, 2016:


  229. 229 Fufina said at 7:47 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    And Rogers, Flacco, and Big Ben were as well. I am not saying 1st round QB’s don’t bust…. they do… a lot. That does not mean you should be gun shy from trying. Look at 3 of those franchises, the shot and missed on Locker, Ponder and Gabbert, and came around trying again and look like they have better prospects the 2nd time around in Mariota, Bridgewater and Bortles.

  230. 230 anon said at 8:08 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    only took a half decade of sucking

  231. 231 DanJ3645 said at 7:29 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    But what’s the point in being mediocre?
    Which is a teams ceiling with out a top QB outside of a brilliant D.
    I want to go into a season believing we have a good chance at winning a Super Bowl.
    We need a QB for can develop into a top 5 type player.

  232. 232 laeagle said at 8:48 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Except for Rodgers (GB got lucky), those guys are all top 15 picks. How many #15 picks have we had over the time period you’re talking about? The one time we did, the only QB in the first round was Manuel.

    It’s not an organizational fault. It’s a matter of not having high enough draft picks due to constantly being on the border of contending.

    We could also try and do what Washington did and go all in for a QB prospect, but of course that can fail as well (and usually does).

    The only valid thing you can say is that we haven’t had the opportunity to get a true franchise QB. You can’t say that it’s some sort of failure on the team’s part. We have drafted QBs; it’s just a crap shoot no matter how you slice it.

  233. 233 Mac said at 11:26 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    agree 100% we’ve looked at this more than once over the years… being picked in round 1 doesn’t guarantee anything other than the fact that a team spent a valuable resource to get the player.

  234. 234 bill said at 7:38 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Hard to say which is more important: Picking just the right guy, or picking a guy and coaching (and in some contexts, simply allowing) him to develop by having a better team around him. I think that except in exceptional cases, you need both. So even if you pick a great guy, there’s still a high chance that you ruin him by asking him to be the savior of a really bad team. Loss of confidence, bad habits, etc.

    Mariotta and Winston both look to be good picks, but both could still ultimately be busts because their confidence and trust in a system will get destroyed playing for those disastrous teams. A generational talent, like Luck, can overcome that. But those guys are extremely rare. Not sure either Winston or Mariotta are one of those. So there’s a real risk that you miss on “good enough” guys (and I include Wilson and Flacco in this category, no higher, when they won – Wilson may still develop into more, but his playoff performance this year isn’t encouraging on that front) by waiting to build the rest of the team until you have a generational talent that can overcome the rest of your garbage roster (built through missing on multiple high picks for QB). To say nothing of the misery of being the Cleveland Browns. I like the Steelers/Ravens/recent Niners (they came close to winning SBs with Alex Smith and Kaep, ferchirssakes!)/Seahawks model better than the betting on Powerball model of building a franchise (Indianapolis, essentially, and guess what? They haven’t won one yet with Luck). I think this “you need a top 5 QB to win a SB” is overblown. It certainly helps, but so does a dominant defense. I’d rather the team I root for look to get a generational defense than a generational QB, because the “in between time” will at least be more bearable.

  235. 235 Dave said at 7:47 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Kevin Kolb, did you forget the heir apparent drafted to replace McNabb.

  236. 236 Fufina said at 7:48 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    not a 1st rounder (virtual technicality but i still count it!)

  237. 237 Dave said at 7:54 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Funny thing is we kept getting duped to thinking we had a franchise qb after McNabb.

    First Kolb
    When he got injured, Mike Vick fooled everyone into thinking he has the brains and motivation to go with his natural talent. Shit, we gave him 100 million dollar contract.

    Chip came in and we god hoodwinked by Foles and his unbelievable 27-2 stat line.

    It’s not like the Eagles sat back and did nothing. We just kept mining fool’s gold.

  238. 238 holeplug said at 9:37 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    was actually curious about this so went year by year

    2010 – picked 13 – nothing other than Bradford who went 1st overall and Reid had groomed Kolb to take over
    2011 – Vick just finished 2nd in MVP and signed a contract extension. Not drafting a QB high that year
    2012 – picked 15 – could argue trading up for Tannehill I guess.
    2013 – picked 4 – this is just bad luck more than anything. Finally have a top 5 pick and its the worst QB draft in like a decade
    2014 – picked 22 – Foles just posted 27/2 and outplayed Drew Brees in the wild card game
    2015 – nothing other than Winston/Mariota who went #1-2 overall

    Think they have done just fine considering where they drafted since the McNabb trade. Tannehill was probably a realistic trade up opportunity in 2012 but thats about it and by reaching for him there is no Fletcher Cox. Kolb probably sucked but concussions ended his career early. Vick turned out to be a great gamble b/c of 2010. Same with picking Foles and 2013 season he gave us.

  239. 239 Media Mike said at 5:01 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yeah, the Foles False Prophet season of 2013 drove us all away from QB in the draft in 2014. I was so locked in on Bridgewater as soon as 2012 ended, but thought we were all set with Foles.

  240. 240 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:22 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Knowing Chip, it’s not a lock that he liked Teddy or Carr anyway

    I won’t be surprised if chip tells the Niners he wants Blaine Gabbert to be his QB lol

  241. 241 unhinged said at 12:35 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    I get your point but I think you’re off. If you put the 31 franchise owners under a polygraph they would all state that finding a franchise QP IS a priority. Jeff Lurie would scream it. A dysfunctional FO is the real issue, and Lurie’s “trust me…we’ve got this” evasiveness when it comes to answering how his FO will exploit every opportunity and seize every chance to deliver talent at every position, especially QB, is the elephant in the room. When the Eagles had a franchise QB, the supporting cast was spotty at best. No name WR’s, new lb’s every season, a steady decline at CB. The Eagles approach was our QB will get us there. It isn’t that they are not prioritizing the QB position – they aren’t prioritizing quality across the board. Many of us perceive the absence of a franchise QB as the diagnosis for our failure, but while we are combing the country for that guy, why are we missing on so many other positions where there is plenty of quality every year? Aaron Rodgers on this team today would probably get us our division, but even that is not a certainty.

  242. 242 Anders said at 4:03 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Its hard to draft great QBs when you in general do not draft 1st overall and the year we stunk major ass, there was no good QBs at all.

  243. 243 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:20 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    in terms of building a Super Bowl contender, im confused about which blue print I prefer to build a Super Bowl contender… Im leaning towards preffering an Elite Defense with a Solid QB, instead of an elte QB with a solid defense, especially because it’s probably harder to find that Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady QB than it is to build a top notch defense…. There have been plenty of Super Bowl QBs who were nothing special, Flacco, Kapernick, heck Lovie smith took a journeyman backüp Rex Grossman to the Super Bowl on the backs of an elite Bears defense

    Just look at all the head to head MATCHUPS of BRady vs Peyton, the majority of the time, the better defense won the game..
    You are irrelevant without a QB, but I don’t think you really need a top 7 NFL QB to win it all… Build a good enough team around a good but not great QB and you should be a legit contender..
    This might be an offensive game now, and the new rules hurt defenses, but just look at the Super Bowl matchup. with an elite defense, Peyton just game managed his way to another SB..

  244. 244 eagleyankfan said at 8:39 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    I’m with this model 100%. Saying “oh, let’s just draft an elite QB” is what several teams do, every single year, for the last 30 years. Odds of finding that elite QB has to be harder than winning the SB.

  245. 245 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:51 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Basically, I think we already have a QB that can win, if we stick an elite team around him… Would anyone be that surprised that Bradford could take the Broncos to the Super Bowl if he had THAT talent and defense around him..
    If we draft a QB in round 1, basically it will mean that we invested our 1st and 2nd round pick in this draft and Traded Nick FOles to get some rookie QB from a crappy QB class? Id rather spend 20 mil on a QB, then spend a 1st, a 2nd and FOles on some QB prospect that could very easily bust…we already invested enough in SAM, that im not interested in starting over…. Then again, I would Probably feel different if we were talking about draftong a Marita or Jameis type QB……
    happy we don’t have a top 5 pick, because I would be scared to death of taking any of these QBs that high… Im not sold that any of these QBs will even be as good as Tannahill, and I don’t mean that as a compliment
    If the Eagles had a franchise QB, I doubt fans would still think highly of these QB prospects… Where as, if there is a stud QB available, you draft him even if you spent 20mil on Bradford the day before,.. ONLY draft QBs You absolutely love and would bet the franchise on… I don’t believe you can find an adequate QB in any draft class whenever you need a QB… It does not work that way

  246. 246 eagleyankfan said at 8:58 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Preach. Don’t settle on a QB — “just because” …

  247. 247 D3FB said at 9:41 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Just settle for a QB just because…

    Especially when he’s mediocre and you have to pay him 20 million dollars

  248. 248 eagleyankfan said at 8:56 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    again you’re bringing up this point — and again, I still don’t understand it. Couple of things — nearly all of the had “GREAT” QB’s….let’s go down memory lane:
    Eli (two time winner) — GREAT???
    Flacco — GREAT????
    Wilson — Dilfer — Brad Johnson — Hostetler — Mark Rypien — the list goes on..
    Should I bring up the tremendous Jim McMahon and his 1 SB win(with 0 TD’s)…
    Great/Elite QB’s do not always make SB winners. Is P. Manning “great”? He has 1. Bills QB Kelly. Is he great/elite? 0. Is Brees Great? 1. I guess Theisman and S. Young were great? They have 1 each.
    You said it — it’s extremely difficult to win. Match the extreme difficulty of winning with the extreme difficulty of finding the “great” qb. Even amazingly great QB’s have = 1 SB. How Great is Aaron Rogers? 1 SB.
    Wilson/Flacco/Eli/Ben/Simms/Hostetler/Dilfer/BJohnson etc etc etc — dominating defenses.
    Elway — IMHO – one of the greatest QB to have ever played the game — finally got a SB, then followed that up with another win. Tremendous. Oh, in those two games — 1 TD total in those in those two games. Amazing what a good defense and a great running game can accomplish….

  249. 249 bill said at 9:25 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Wish I could upvote more than once.

  250. 250 bsuperfi said at 10:19 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    I think it’s clear that there are different models for winning a super bowl. A pretty good QB is necessary but not sufficient. A great QB or just a good QB who gets hot can carry a team. Drafting a great QB is often like hitting the lottery, so chances may be better of producing a team in the short term that’s great by bolstering the d and run game. Though it’s hard to keep this kind of team together forever because of the salary cap, and a having a great QB is the recipe for long term winning (though not necessarily super bowl victories).

    Whether the Eagles should roll the dice on a first round QB depends on where they think the rest of the team is at. There’s no easy answer here. I tend to think we’re in a weird limbo zone where there’s a reasonable argument for both sides. Some good to great pieces on both sides of the ball (though mostly defense). But I dont think it’s clear that one or two more pieces puts the running game and/or defense into elite territory. A decent QB free agent who has a chance to get better but with a big contract. A couple intriguing Qbs in the draft but certainly tons of risk.

    I just want to see a coherent plan. Or at least a way of dealing with Bradford that doesn’t make me groan.

  251. 251 eagleyankfan said at 11:33 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    CK had a plan — it’s Vick, no, no wait, it’s Foles, no, no wait it’s Bradford… I wonder what he would have done if he’s still here….I agree — clear plan would be great…

  252. 252 bill said at 12:43 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    No problem with taking a swing at a 1st rd QB you have confidence in. In fact it would be a problem if they don’t take that swing, because QB is very important and they’re very hard to find. But I have a problem with the long term plan being “we’re going to pretty much sacrifice every thing else in an attempt to draft a franchise QB,” or “we’ll just keep drafting them highly until we get one,” or the worst “we’ll just draft one this year.”

  253. 253 RobNE said at 8:58 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    It seems like often having a good team enables the QB youngster to reach his potential (Brady, Ben, Wilson), so I think a team needs to selectively choose QB’s in the draft. You can’t just ignore the team and wait for a QB savior (and use tons of picks) b/c the QB is less likely to achieve elite status if the team has no talent.

  254. 254 Greg Richards said at 7:57 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Good info here on personnel coordinator search:

    Eagles spoke with Mark Dominik, but he wants to stay at ESPN. Hunt is actually interviewing for 2nd time tomorrow, first interview was yesterday. Eagles are thought to have talked with number of people, but it seems like not all are known. Says that Morocco Brown is on radar. Brown was regarded as a hot up-and-comer at one point. Was hired by CLE and of course got lost on all the nonsense that happens there. I don’t think that should necessarily reflect poorly on him. McLane also says an internal promotion of Joseph is possible, although I think if you promote Joseph you’d also have to bring in other guys just to have enough numbers-wise.

  255. 255 ChoTime said at 8:41 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Still raiding Cleveland’s stellar staff? Interesting.

  256. 256 Greg Richards said at 8:42 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Morocco Brown was considered a good get for them when hired. Not necessarily his fault that their owner is an idiot and directed their GM to tell the coach how to coach during games.

  257. 257 ChoTime said at 9:05 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    It just seems we’re going after an inordinate number of Cleveland guys. Also keep hearing hints that people don’t want to work here. #narrative, you know.

  258. 258 Greg Richards said at 9:08 PM on January 28th, 2016:

    Our coaching staff is pretty good. You here that narrative and guys do leave often but Eagles/Howie are pretty good at closing deals. $ talks.

  259. 259 Media Mike said at 4:59 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Your command of the English language is putrid Greg. Allow me to fix one sentence for you because you’re demonstrating a lack of knowledge on verb tenses.

    “Not necessarily his fault that their owner is an idiot and DIRECTS, and will continue to direct, their GM to tell the coach how to coach during games.”

    RG3 to the Browns; book it!

  260. 260 anon said at 12:16 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Travis Kelce doing a dating show didn’t he see how that worked out for TO?

  261. 261 Media Mike said at 4:56 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Hopefully Jason Kelce is doing a dating show with the weight room.

  262. 262 Bert's Bells said at 7:47 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Maybe that’s how he got that hernia.

  263. 263 Flyin said at 12:43 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Can anyone post another site worth going to besides this one and the official eagles site for videos?

  264. 264 Flyin said at 12:50 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    It seems over the years, Tommy is the only one to stay true to his colors. Brandon Lee Gee, JasonB, and Kempski have migrated into the regular hacks of the Philly media.

  265. 265 Eagles News: Fletcher Cox wants to stay in Philadelphia for the long run - said at 6:24 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    […] Settling In – Iggles BlitzPederson met with a small group of media in Mobile on Wednesday. He was much more comfortable and natural. He’s been on the job for a bit now so he’s getting used to talking. The setting was different. He was near a chain link fence at football practice. Coaches are going to be more natural there than when wearing a suit and standing in an auditorium. Pederson took the questions from reporters and answered them as honestly as he could. The media actually ran out of things to ask. I think they were genuinely surprised at how the meeting went. Pederson gave them enough nuggets for multiple articles. Unlike Chip, he wasn’t dodging questions and playing the semantics game (“I’m not the GM”). I came away feeling good about Pederson. […]

  266. 266 Aaron said at 7:50 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    good morning

  267. 267 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:10 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    malcolm Jenkins was raving about his meeting with Pederson, talks about what a great first impression he got after talking to Doug, and how he is excited for this new direction.
    Not that big of a deal, but I’d rather our star players get a good first impression from Doug, than to come away thinking they are now being led by a moron..
    Kiko talked and refused to use anything as an excuse, wouldn’t even really admit that he was injured
    Cox sounds excited about the reunion with his DL coach, not surprised..

  268. 268 GermanEagle said at 9:14 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    When is that? but not til his kids graduate
    When is that?

  269. 269 Dave said at 9:36 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    His youngest, twins daughters, are 9 years old.

  270. 270 GermanEagle said at 9:39 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Lol. So he won’t join our coaching staff before 2029…

  271. 271 GermanEagle said at 9:37 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    If Lane Johnson gets “Left Tackle”- kinda money [around $10m/year], Jason Peters and Sam Bradford may both not be back with the Eagles next season…!

  272. 272 myartz04 said at 9:48 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Will be interesting to see the numbers.

  273. 273 D3FB said at 10:02 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    The top paid RT makes 6.75 mil a year. He was never gonna take anything in that range. It’ll be something around 5 years and 45-50 guaranteed.

  274. 274 GermanEagle said at 10:12 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    He will end up getting 10m/year, disagree on your estimated gtd money though. It will be more like 25-30m gtd.

  275. 275 D3FB said at 10:30 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Agreed, I meant guaranteed as in stone cold lock rather than guaranteed $$$. That would be awful to give him almost 100% guaranteed.

  276. 276 GermanEagle said at 10:47 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Lol, yes!

  277. 277 Bert's Bells said at 10:30 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Good call if Bowen correct.

  278. 278 D3FB said at 10:36 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    That’s a fake account

  279. 279 Fufina said at 10:05 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Also it will have very little cap impact in 2016. Lets say there is a $10mil signing bonus it will only add $2mil to this years cap over his current deal which will stay the same.

  280. 280 D3FB said at 10:32 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Lane already had $6mil cap hit in 2016. So the figure won’t massively increase in terms of our 2016 budget. Most of the guaranteed probably comes from roster bonuses in year 2 and 3, and high unguarnteed base salaries last couple years.

  281. 281 Dave said at 10:16 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    The way Howie (and Banner) do these extensions is that they trypically add them on to the end of the existing contract. Ertz for example signed a 5-year contract extension that does not kick in until the 2016 season ends. He got a signing bonus and adjusted salary, but the numbers were relatively low this year. I imagine Lane’s contract will be similar.

  282. 282 laeagle said at 11:30 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    and…that’s exactly what happened! Good call.

  283. 283 Gian GEAGLE said at 12:03 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Not exactly pal

  284. 284 scratcherk said at 10:34 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Just lookin at cap numbers…

    We currently have about 13 million in cap space. Savings with potential cuts:

    Sanchez — 3.5 mill
    Cooper — 2.9 mill
    Ryans — 3.5 mill

    Thats another 10 million, leaving us with 23 million going into FA. Possible restructure of JPs could add some money. If for some reason we could trade Murray, that would free up a ton of money but dont know what team would be stupid enough to take the cap hit from the dead money.

  285. 285 anon said at 10:38 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    wouldn’t we have tons of dead $$ in a murray trade? i could let kendricks go.

  286. 286 A_T_G said at 10:39 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    A trade sends his cap hit with him. Cutting him leaves us with dead money.

    Edit: Which is why both are unlikely.

  287. 287 D3FB said at 10:47 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    No. Acquiring team acquires guaranteed salary. We only eat remaining bonus money as the prorated cap hits would be accelerated. You can’t cut him. But if there’s a sucker you can trade him

    Kemspki walked through contractual options

  288. 288 the DONALD said at 10:40 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Nailed it! thats a fake Les Bowen

  289. 289 oreofestar said at 10:59 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    I’m seeing 5 years $63 mil with 35 guaranteed and its scaring me

  290. 290 Anders said at 11:01 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    the word is max value, aka the BS number

  291. 291 oreofestar said at 11:02 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Heh I’ll wait for specifics but its still scary

  292. 292 Anders said at 11:04 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    why? Howie is the best cap guy in the NFL, he know how to make the client and agent happy with funny numbers while not hurting the Eagles

  293. 293 Gian GEAGLE said at 12:02 PM on January 29th, 2016:


  294. 294 GermanEagle said at 11:07 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Don’t be afraid.

  295. 295 Nailed It! said at 11:28 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    I see 6 years.

  296. 296 oreofestar said at 11:01 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Ian confirming 5/63/35.5 uuuuuuh

  297. 297 anon said at 11:04 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    maybe now he’ll have that pro bowl contract. does it say when the new $ kicks in, is that 2017 $?

  298. 298 oreofestar said at 11:05 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Some people including Shefty saying 6 years….are they just counting next year as part of it or is it maybe a 6 year extension

  299. 299 Dave said at 11:07 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    The new contact is a 5-year extension on his current deal that runs through the 2016 season. 6 years is the total time Lane is under contract. I’m assuming this lets the agent puff a higher contract yearly average and helps the Eagles in some sort of salary cap move.

  300. 300 Iskar36 said at 11:45 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    My understanding is its not an extension. Its a 6 year deal starting this year.

  301. 301 oreofestar said at 11:47 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    That’s an extension, he already had this year so it will be this year plus the prorated bonus money on top of 5 new years

  302. 302 Iskar36 said at 11:48 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    And the total of which comes to 63 or is it 63 plus this year/prorated bonus money?

  303. 303 oreofestar said at 12:03 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I’m not sure honestly

  304. 304 A_T_G said at 12:25 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    From what I understand it replaces the option year for 2017 (11.1 guaranteed) and the 6.5 million (3.1 guaranteed) for 2016.

    The Eagles site is listing it at 6 years through 2021, so it must start immediately, right? And the 63 million must be the total of those 6 years.

    Whether you say it is a 63 million, 6-year deal or a 57 million, 5-year extension is pretty academic at that point, isn’t it?

  305. 305 Iskar36 said at 12:39 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    The part I was trying to clarify was if it is 5 years, 63 mil, after this year+ 6 mil, meaning 6 years 69 mil total vs. 6 year 63 mil, period. I think it is just the 6 year 63 mil (one way or the other) after reading a few places.

    At a basic level, I like the deal a lot considering that with the cap continuing to increase, after a few other OTs sign deals, Lane’s deal will look great in comparison. There is some level of projecting Lane’s ability to continue to progress, but in a 6 year long deal, you would hope that to be the case and that also avoids some issues in the future if Lane proves to be a Pro Bowl level tackle. With that said, how the contract is written in terms of base salary each year will show really how good this deal is or isn’t.

  306. 306 A_T_G said at 12:43 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Agreed, on all fronts.

  307. 307 Dave said at 11:56 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    You may be right, conflicting reports on Twitter.

  308. 308 Anders said at 11:14 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    For people thinking 35 mill guaranteed is a lot, remember that this year was 6 mill guaranteed and next years 5th year option would be 10-11 mill.

    That is 16-17 mill guaranteed right there he would have gotten no matter what. The rest is most likely high base salary only guaranteed for injury, so he is easy to cut if performance is never there

  309. 309 oreofestar said at 11:24 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    I don’t think the guaranteed is all that high but the annual number seems to be, but depends on the exact structure

  310. 310 Anders said at 11:16 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Lane guarantee: remember that he had $3.1mm due this year and an option for over $11.1mm next. That's $14.2mm that was already "guaranteed".— Sam Lynch (@shlynch) 29. januar 2016

  311. 311 GermanEagle said at 11:24 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    So when will the Eagles re-structure Jason Peters’ contract [hopefully]?!

  312. 312 johhnyblaze said at 11:51 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Just read eagles are close to an extension with Fletcher

  313. 313 TypicalDouche said at 11:52 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    Forget previous opinions on Howie, I am really liking what he is doing right now with these contracts to our home grown talent. 1st Ertz, then Lane, now it appears Cox is next, then hopefully Curry right after. Thumbs up to Roseman in my book.

  314. 314 Gian GEAGLE said at 12:01 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Clearing 17mil in Cap space with these extensions according to McLane… hello Bradford!!,

  315. 315 ACViking said at 12:37 PM on January 29th, 2016:


    I love the predictions about who’s getting resigned and when.

    Reminds me of how “sources” told someone that Jeremy Maclin’s new contract with the Eagles was always just about to happen.

  316. 316 TypicalDouche said at 1:09 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Oh I definitely agree with you on the whole “sources” thing. I don’t usually tend to really believe those things, but with the way reports have been leaking then the predictions being fulfilled by Howie I am starting to fall for “sources”. I better get myself together on that.

    In regards to the Maclin situation, that was just downright nuts imo. I remember easily what you’re saying about the constent reports of the Maclin deal being basically “a done deal”. Boy were those reports ever wrong.

  317. 317 ACViking said at 1:16 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    You hit on the irony this off-season that “leaks” — which the Eagles reportedly hate — have been accurate.

    But last year, when Novacare was known to be leaking like a sieve, the rumors turned out way off.

    I think Lurie’s very happy right now that he canned Kelly.

    Order’s been restored to his franchise. He did indeed take it back.

  318. 318 TypicalDouche said at 1:27 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Well said and I agree wholeheartedly AC.

  319. 319 D3FB said at 5:30 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Hard for Gamble to leak from San Fran.

  320. 320 xmbk said at 9:07 AM on January 31st, 2016:

    It’s all about keeping the press happy.

  321. 321 oreofestar said at 11:55 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    10 years $154M for Cox

  322. 322 oreofestar said at 11:55 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    I don’t even care how old he will be lol

  323. 323 TypicalDouche said at 11:58 AM on January 29th, 2016:

    I like where your heads at on that one. Being that he is only 25, he can absolutely play till 35 why not.

  324. 324 Gian GEAGLE said at 12:00 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Jeff McLane: extending Lane, Cox, Ertz and Curry doesn’t mean we can’t pay Bradford, actually it makes it more likely that we retain Bradford because Howie cleared about 17mil in cap space handing out these extension.
    Like I said, stop crying about money, Roseman is in charge, and contract gymnastics is what he does best…

  325. 325 oreofestar said at 12:03 PM on January 29th, 2016:


  326. 326 Gian GEAGLE said at 12:05 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    People crying about money are a joke, when the fuck was the last time a HOWIE team had a screwed cap situation.???mFools running their uneducated mouths, shut up and watch Roseman work!! Contracts and the cap gymnastics are his one redeeming quality

  327. 327 oreofestar said at 12:12 PM on January 29th, 2016:


  328. 328 botto said at 12:14 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    ha! get your shine box! that’s classic.
    if you can trust Howie with anything its the cap.

  329. 329 laeagle said at 1:37 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Howie’s a slide rule guy.

    And shine boxes are just as nerdy as calculators/slide rules.

  330. 330 GermanEagle said at 12:08 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Let’s see how much $$$ is actually front- and back loaded, respectively. Don’t think Eagles will save $17m in this year’s cap by extending all of the aforementioned players.

  331. 331 Gian GEAGLE said at 12:13 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Take that up with McLane,,, and whatever the figure is, bet HOWIE isnt even close to being done clearing Cap space, but we’ll see..

  332. 332 Iskar36 said at 12:10 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I don’t think money availability has been the major issue with Bradford. The issue is value. We could have all the cap space in the world, but is Bradford worth a huge contract will remain the question.

  333. 333 ACViking said at 12:35 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Some folks on this board (1 at least) would give Bradford a blank check.

  334. 334 ACViking said at 12:30 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    How did Roseman “clear[ ] . . . cap space” for 2016 with contract extensions that become effective in 2017?

    Seems you’re relying on McLane’s statement. Maybe you can explain the math.

  335. 335 Sean Stott said at 1:36 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Prorating and accelerated cap hits and moneyball and stuff man, duh.

  336. 336 ACViking said at 2:10 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Sean . . .

    None of that happened. Not any.

    You can’t accelerate or pro-rate cap hits with extensions that start AFTER the next season.

    Sam Lynch confirms.

    (I’ll ignore the “duh,” since your facts were wrong)

  337. 337 Sean Stott said at 2:33 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    you guys thought I was being serious?

  338. 338 bill said at 2:45 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I’m usually pretty bad at detecting internet sarcasm, but the Lebowski-like “man” set off my alarms on this one.

  339. 339 nevadausa16 said at 2:13 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    wrongo, dude. extensions that take effect after the upcoming season have ZERO effect on the cap for the upcoming season.
    there’s no “money ball stuff” there

  340. 340 Sean Stott said at 2:42 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Calm down, I thought it was obvious I was joking about not knowing when I threw in moneyball. Jesus.

  341. 341 RC5000 said at 12:40 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    McLane is backtracking from this, it doesn’t sound like he has the info needed. I wouldn’t count on that much space cleared if any. But sam says Ertz went up but I thought his extension started in 17 so I don’t know who’s correct. Need to wait for spotrac or overthecap when dust settles.

    Sam Lynch ‏@shlynch 33m33 minutes ago

    Howie is doing these deals for the longer term benefit. This isn’t carving out space this year.

    Jeff McLane ‏@Jeff_McLane 14m14 minutes ago

    @shlynch Long-term is obvious, but these deals will collectively clear out cap space for 2016-17

    Sam Lynch ‏@shlynch 4m4 minutes ago

    @Jeff_McLane That’s just not true. Ertz’s # in 2016 went up. Johnson’s will too. Celek’s still more expensive than backup TEs should be.

    Jeff McLane


    @shlynch Well, I have to see the final numbers first. But the deals don’t preclude the Eagles from bringing Sam back.

  342. 342 GermanEagle said at 12:11 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Extending players like Ertz, Lane and possibly Cox are nice. However the biggest priority should be Curry since the risks of losing him via Free Agency are much greater than the others mentioned above, since they were not become an unrestricted FA.

  343. 343 TypicalDouche said at 12:12 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Curry could also be looked at as a luxury for them at the same time as the Eagles do have players that can play DE if he doesn’t resign. I am not saying that’s how they view him because they have done nothing but talk about how important he is. The others were more important to me as they could have been more expensive down the road.

  344. 344 GermanEagle said at 12:16 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Curry in a 4-3 is a necessity, not a luxury.

  345. 345 TypicalDouche said at 12:26 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    You are correct that DEs are a necessity in a 4-3 but are incorrect that he is a necessity. You can draft DEs that can play alongside Cox and Logan and have success. Also Graham and Barwin can play DE as well. I am not arguing that Curry isn’t important but in no way is he a necessity. I still hope he gets resigned though.

  346. 346 Iskar36 said at 12:15 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    True, but while some of those other contracts will be bigger money, I bet the Curry signing will be a harder negotiation. The Eagles had leverage on Ertz, Lane and Cox. As a pending FA, Curry can leverage the risk of losing him to another team to make the negotiation harder.

  347. 347 GermanEagle said at 12:17 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That’s why the risks of losing him are much greater.

  348. 348 Iskar36 said at 12:18 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yea. From the sounds of it, it seems like it should get done, but I can see why that deal would take a bit more time than the others. Hopefully it isn’t something we are worrying about come the start of FA.

  349. 349 Gian GEAGLE said at 12:16 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Curry ISNT going anywhere, and im pretty sure it’s almost a done deal

  350. 350 botto said at 12:17 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I hope Lane doesn’t start signing his contract to soon.
    he needs to wait until the paper is on the desk.

  351. 351 ChoTime said at 12:49 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I see what you… tried… to do there.

  352. 352 oreofestar said at 12:53 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I don’t :/

  353. 353 A_T_G said at 12:54 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    It was a false start reference.

  354. 354 ChoTime said at 12:56 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    We are all penalized 10 yards for that joke.

  355. 355 A_T_G said at 1:10 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Having been on both sides, when one of my jokes miss I always hope that they are allowed to sail past unnoticed to die with dignity in that almost funny place in the sky. Instead, we pulled this one down, dissected it, and put its innards on display. Sorry, botto.

  356. 356 botto said at 1:29 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    haha! I know, I really couldn’t figure out how to word it, at least it was some what apparent.
    please re-word it better, I know there is a joke there somewhere? right?

  357. 357 botto said at 1:29 PM on January 29th, 2016:


  358. 358 Insomniac said at 12:19 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Lane is making almost as much as Tyron Smith. I don’t like that at all especially when Lane hasn’t been what we hoped he would be.

  359. 359 Dave said at 12:35 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    He’s only been in the league for 3 years. I guess you were hoping he would be as good as Jason Peters. Just for shits and giggles, look at how Jason Peters entered the league.

    2004 – Undrafted, spent much of the season on Buffalo’s practice squad. Signed in November to play special teams

    2005- Special teams, not starting OL

    2006 – Starting right tackle

    2007 – Started the season at right tackle, after week 7, started at left tackle. Voted starting left tackle for Pro Bowl

    I’d say Lane is doing fine.

  360. 360 Insomniac said at 12:48 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    but JP was a TE in college..

  361. 361 Dave said at 12:56 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Lane was a QB and TE for the 1st two years of college. RT for junior year. LT for senior year.

  362. 362 Insomniac said at 12:58 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Still 2 more years of experience than JP had in college.

  363. 363 BobSmith77 said at 2:14 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Johnson was also 4th draft in the draft. Kind of a dumb comparison.

  364. 364 ChoTime said at 12:49 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I hope that’s tongue-in-cheek and not seriously suggesting that Peters’ career arc is typical for a Pro Bowl-caliber player.

  365. 365 Dave said at 12:55 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Just showing that there is room for improvement. What a player is at the end of year 3 is not necessarily what they will be for the rest of their career.

  366. 366 ChoTime said at 1:00 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That’s true and perhaps some forget that. But it’s much more likely that his path will be similar to other players who have played about like him. In other words, that he will continue to be somewhat above average. In the same way, it’s much more likely that Bradford will continue to be average, with tantalizing physical tools, and a loser; than that the light bulb goes on and he ascends to a level where he would be worth paying 1/8th of the cap for.

  367. 367 Dave said at 1:59 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Johnson has the ability to dominate, not just be above average.

    Bradford’s numbers on the year were average, his play (not stats) in the 2nd half of the season was exceptional.

  368. 368 BobSmith77 said at 2:13 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Actually that is not true and generally a player’s career arc is pretty well set at year 3 especially at a few positions including RB.

  369. 369 Dave said at 2:20 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Is this your opinion or is this something you read somewhere?

    Career arc? It should be somewhat of a career bell curve. Very few retire at the top of their game. Players tend to be ascending or descending. Are you saying Lane plateaued already we can’t expect him to get better?

    I fully disagree with your post.

  370. 370 TypicalDouche said at 12:35 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    He has been what we have hoped for out of a RT. Lets wait till he makes the move to LT permanently in order to pass valid judgment on his performance. Also such a young player that has room to grow, to early to discount him the way you did.

  371. 371 Insomniac said at 12:48 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Small sample size for Lane but he hasn’t looked like the cornerstone LT that we hope he could be when we played Dallas.

  372. 372 b3nz0z said at 1:08 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    he got moved over the week of. not a fair test. not saying he’s all that, but you can’t judge him from that

  373. 373 TypicalDouche said at 1:11 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I do understand where you are coming from, but lets also take into account that he has only been playing offensive line for 5 years I believe dating back to his collegiate days. When you compare that to some other tackles who have played the position for a better part of their careers, Johnson still has room to grow. I guess I just have faith that he is still learning.

  374. 374 anon said at 12:39 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yes locked until 2021 after 2017 season he’s getting on avg $7m guaranteed per year . These Ks are always problematic at the end. Bc no one is ever worth that unguaranteed money and no one ever wants to ‘take a pay cut”. But that’s a problem for down the road.

  375. 375 A_T_G said at 12:36 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Hopefully these deals don’t preclude the team from purchasing a larger piece of Eagles-logo fabric for the backdrop.

    Lane Johnson: Intimates there's language in contract about move to LT. That's what the #Eagles drafted me for:— Jeff McLane (@Jeff_McLane) January 29, 2016

  376. 376 A_T_G said at 12:40 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I give up. At least the image just appears twice now instead of three times. Anders, others, if you want to give a tutorial how I can just get a tweet to show up once, I am all ears (eyes?).

  377. 377 ChoTime said at 12:48 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That’s called a step-and-repeat. Maybe they need to buy one for monster-sized people.

  378. 378 anon said at 12:42 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    New gm is not going to have much to do if Howie locks up everyone long term .

  379. 379 ACViking said at 12:44 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    What the Eagles are doing with the extensions seems to be re-imposing order on the disorder left by Kelly.

    Call it restoring “Eagles culture.”

    Kelly never gave the impression he did business this way.

    That’s why, if Bradford is re-signed, it will not be for a crazy number. Can’t say that would’ve been true of Kelly.

  380. 380 scratcherk said at 12:47 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    i would say we should have done this with maclin, but you can’t pay everyone i guess. I think we’ll be fine with JMatt and Ags in a WCO. Esp with Ertz slicing up the middle.

  381. 381 scratcherk said at 12:48 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    the maclin situation also shows the benefit of signing these extensions before these guys hit FA.

  382. 382 ACViking said at 12:49 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    On the other hand . . .

    Maclin was coming off an ACL. No question he was low-balled on an extension. Was that Roseman or Kelly?

  383. 383 scratcherk said at 12:53 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    certainly sounds like Howie.

  384. 384 A_T_G said at 12:59 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    You are squeezing that comment in today, between the first three and 4th, possibly 5th extensions are announced within weeks of Howie retaking the wheel?

  385. 385 RC5000 said at 12:57 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Maclin took a risk and it paid off. Look at Kiko who struggled coming back.

  386. 386 A_T_G said at 1:04 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yep, the injury forced the team to be more conservative in their offer. Maclin chose to pass on the safe route and bet on his own health. Both actions are rational.

  387. 387 RC5000 said at 12:50 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    They tried, he had to come back from torn acl. They couldn’t reach a deal.

  388. 388 ACViking said at 12:48 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    You’re right.

    Unfortunately, that wasn’t how Kelly did business.

  389. 389 anon said at 12:51 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Can’t pay everyone. Lane deal is smart bc you can blend his lt money with his rt money.

  390. 390 BobSmith77 said at 1:30 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Agree but are they really well-restructured deals that will ensure the Eagles get good value out of them ultimately.

    Banner was a bit of blowhard here but he came out pretty well on the positive side of the ledger for the extensions he gave out to younger players & who he didn’t.

  391. 391 Nailed It! said at 1:07 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Travis Kelce signs slightly bigger contract than Ertz.

  392. 392 BobSmith77 said at 1:27 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Not crazy about either the Ertz (still has yet to put even together a dominant 7-8 game stretch) and especially Johnson extension.

    Johnson seems like an overpay for a guy who has been above average/good but isn’t a franchise-caliber tackle. Pretty dubious too about moving him over to LT too to replace Peters as the long-term solution there.

    Wonder if this means they are going to approach Peters this offseason now and ask him to redo his deal.

  393. 393 ACViking said at 1:31 PM on January 29th, 2016:


    Maybe in assessing these deals, we should be factoring in the big jumps in the cap that seem to be around the corner every 2-3 years . . . when TV contracts get redone (or whatever the reason).

    Fits with Banner’s tweet about Ertz — and now Johnson, presumably — regretting their extensions later.

    In that context, the deals may be very sound.

  394. 394 Eaglesfannn66 said at 1:42 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That is ALWAYS factored into the equation. You wouldn’t go out and buy a new car if :
    1 ) you can’t afford it – TODAY.
    2 ) You won’t be getting a raise ( I.e. – cap going up ) in the FUTURE.

  395. 395 BobSmith77 said at 1:53 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That to me is the key and I’ll be frankly honest that is where Roseman’s probably has the most acumen.

  396. 396 laeagle said at 1:33 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Strongly disagree with your assessment of Johnson. Johnson is a franchise caliber tackle, especially at RT. And he’s very young and still developing. Was he Peters in year 3? No, but neither was Peters. He’s a cornerstone player, like Runyan was so many years ago.

  397. 397 Eaglesfannn66 said at 1:39 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    This ( contract stuff ) is completely in Rosemans wheel house. I have complete confidence in all his offseason moves, so far. He is terrific at putting together a – 2016 / medium / long range – ( team-vision / cap structure. ) He has a ” big picture ” plan, and he’s going al in. Love it. PS – not a Howie ( player evaluation ) fan, but he is really, really good at : player and draft pick ( values. ) If he ADDS and LISTENS TOO, a great – player personnel evaluator, the team will be in business.

  398. 398 RC5000 said at 1:40 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Ertz has worked hard on his blocking. He hasn’t always been utilized in the passing game a lot. Gronk didn’t put together a dominant 7-8 game stretch this year.

    Lane IS a franchise tackle. A franchise player is someone who will be your starter for 5+ years imo. At the same time I don’t think he’s elite yet but he’s the best young lineman we have and we don’t need to open up holes and let guys coming into their prime walk. We don’t need to keep trying to sign other team’s free agents.

  399. 399 BobSmith77 said at 1:56 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Gronk is already one of the best TEs in the game and probably creeps up into the all-time category because of his unique athletic ability. Ertz arguably isn’t even a Top 10 TE in the NFL yet. Makes almost no sense to compare the two.

    I wouldn’t say Johnson has been underwhelming but he was the No 3 pick in the draft too. Yeah it is a really small sample size but he didn’t play well at all in his brief foray as a LT this year vs Miami and TB.

  400. 400 GermanEagle said at 2:00 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Good luck with finding followers for your argument that Ertz is not in the top 10 TEs in this league. Lol

  401. 401 BobSmith77 said at 2:08 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Personal opinion and your right. Likely would be between 5-10.

    Just seems to be very inconsistent at blocking yet, struggles a bit in the red zone, and isn’t the dynamic after he catches the ball in the open field.

  402. 402 GermanEagle said at 2:10 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    He’ll be in the conversation of a top 3 TE in two years down the line. Despite his blocking…

  403. 403 Iskar36 said at 2:15 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That would be nice, and I could definitely see the possibility of that, but that’s a bold prediction. Certainly by no means a lock. He hasn’t proven to be dominant just yet.

  404. 404 GermanEagle said at 2:17 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That’s why I used the term ‘2’ years. 😉

  405. 405 D3FB said at 5:12 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    And he’s being paid between 5-10. The thing to remember is he had a core muscle injury in TC. That makes blocking incredibly difficult.

  406. 406 RC5000 said at 2:04 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    You brought up Ertz needs to have a dominant 7-8 game stretch. I merely pointed out one of the best TEs didn’t do that. I wasn’t comparing them I was merely pointing out why your comment was stupid.

  407. 407 BobSmith77 said at 2:07 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That’s due to largely injury and health-related issues.

  408. 408 BobSmith77 said at 2:11 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    BS. Just look at those stats from the bye to the end of the season. Ridiculous for a TE.

  409. 409 RC5000 said at 2:16 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    He had 2 rec for 18 yards at Miami and 5 rec for 54 yards against Titans , that’s not dominating. He dominated for 3 game stretch to open season. Show me the 7 or 8 consecutive games he dominated 70+ yards

  410. 410 BobSmith77 said at 2:17 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yes he dominated for that stretch overall if you look at the production.

  411. 411 RC5000 said at 2:32 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    OK you want to play it that way, Ertz’s overall final 7 game stretch was 539 yards. Gronk’s was 560 yards final 7 game stretch.

  412. 412 Eaglesfannn66 said at 1:32 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Two comments. 1 ) James Bradberry – CB at Senior Bowl ( via viewing his video ) seems to be a one trick pony ( relies almost exclusively on – bail technique ) and doesn’t seem to : hustle / play to whistle and also, doesn’t seem to be a physical player.
    2 ) My personal impression of Doug Pederson, after listening to – multiple interviews, is the hat he : Does not come across as very articulate. Is not adept at answering questions ( that he doesn’t have answers too or is trying to avoid answering ) without – rambling and talking in circles. Doesn’t mean he won’t – connect with players or be a good coach, but it is of concern to me. Looking back at the history of great NFL – players and coaches, they almost always seemed to be very articulate, and are / were, able to express their thoughts very well. Let’s hope ( as Tommy stated in article ) that it’s just his nerves, and he’ll improve as he becomes more – relaxed and confident.

  413. 413 Nick C said at 1:37 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yeah Bill Belichick is always so articulate and wins every press conference.

  414. 414 Eaglesfannn66 said at 1:48 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    This is NOT about press conferences. Have you ever watched – Bill Belichick’s – team meetings, locker room discussions or sideline ” mic’d up “, discussions ? He is very, very – smart / articulate. We have a ( complete ) view of Belichick, but for now, the Doug Pederson case, is still – to be determined.

  415. 415 Dave said at 1:54 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That’s like saying a 3 month old baby doesn’t seem intelligent based on their poopy face. Maybe let Pederson coach a few practices or better yet, an actual game, before you voicing your concerns.

  416. 416 Nick C said at 2:00 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    You may be correct. But the simple fact is that the guy hasn’t had that opportunity yet. I wasn’t the biggest fan of his hire at first. But I do like the coaching staff he has assembled. Obviously, the jury is still out. But at least let the guy let you down before you go all pessimist.

  417. 417 Eaglesfannn66 said at 5:04 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I didn’t go – all pessimistic. I pointed out, my opinion of his ” current ” communication skills. I also stated that – we’ll see – going forward. Nerves, may be a factor. But, he is not : a young man / a NFL rookie, etc. He should be comfortable, talking his vocation, by now ? As his staff is concerned – I’m ecstatic. Love Swartz, quarterback coach, D line coach – keeping secondary and special teams coach. Probably one of the better staffs in the league. Won’t be getting out coached, that’s for sure.

  418. 418 anon said at 2:17 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    big jump talking from HS moms to Jimmy Kempski every day.

  419. 419 Dave said at 2:55 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I would have though the opposite. It’s much harder to talk to an overprotective mother than the child sitting in the back seat drawing stick figures in his coloring book.

  420. 420 Eaglesfannn66 said at 5:06 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    When you go to Super Bowl six times, you can be a d**k at press conferences.

  421. 421 unhinged said at 1:38 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    “Looking back at the history of great NFL – players and coaches, they almost always seemed to be very articulate, and are / were, able to express their thoughts very well.”

    30 million Patriot fans would beg to differ.

  422. 422 Eaglesfannn66 said at 1:43 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    If you NOTICE, he Doesn’t ” say ” much.

  423. 423 BobSmith77 said at 2:01 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    This is largely bogus and Belicheck is very quick with the quips. Ditto when NFL has taped stuff and been allowed more closed-door access.

  424. 424 Sean Stott said at 1:37 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Howie is killing it. He da real MVP

  425. 425 GermanEagle said at 1:45 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Here’s a big middle finger up to Chip Kelly for trying to install the 3-4 defense in Philly. Now Gtfoh !!

  426. 426 anon said at 1:47 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Does anyone think that Howie was screwing chip with Ks? Do we think chip had a say on structuring the $$? The DM contract doesn’t seem like a howie deal, neither does MK, or exercising the option on Cox when you probably could have locked him up cheaper as a 34 2-Gap DL than as Baby Suh (hndsight being 20/02). The Cox deal is almost a “must do” prior to the season.

  427. 427 Dave said at 1:48 PM on January 29th, 2016:


  428. 428 anon said at 2:12 PM on January 29th, 2016:


  429. 429 GermanEagle said at 2:15 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Starts with K?! 😉

  430. 430 Dave said at 2:52 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Like how everyone calls Geoff Mosher by his nickname Jay:-o

  431. 431 Dave said at 2:21 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Is this some new hip thing to call contract’s K’s or did you just make this up? Are strikeouts in baseball still K’s or have they been renamed too;-)

  432. 432 anon said at 2:48 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I actually don’t know where it came from, but i can’t take credit for it.

  433. 433 bill said at 2:52 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I’ve seen it in legal shorthand.

  434. 434 RobNE said at 3:24 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    law school; that’s how I outed Anon as a lawyer last week.

  435. 435 Dave said at 3:32 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Got it, thx.

  436. 436 D3FB said at 5:09 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Kendricks deal has Howie’s fingerprints. Murrays valuation was likely set by Chip and Howie worked the breakdown the best he could. I’m sure Howie would’ve loved to extend Cox but Chip controlled strategy. Picking up the option is overwhelmingly common though.

  437. 437 anon said at 5:39 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yeah not sure how i feel about the option. Do you pick it up then negotiate or do you re-sign and capitalize that option year (which is typically a fair bump anyway) like in the LJ deal and get “headline” credit for $ you’re paying anyway..

  438. 438 bsuperfi said at 1:47 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Even with some of the contract numbers looking scary at first glance, I think I’m pretty happy with the signings. OT and TE are marquee positions in today’s game. When you find guys like Lane and Ertz, you hold on to them. Celek is a little high from a cold accounting standpoint, but overpaying on performance to pick up the intangibles makes a ton of sense in a critical transition year. I’m happy paying Curry if it’s not completely crazy money because of the importance of a DE like him in a scheme like this. These are just about no-brainers to me, especially if Roseman structured the deals as well as we think (uh, hope?).

    It’s all about how the team deals with Bradford. That’ll be the thing that says the most about this offseason.

  439. 439 Sean Stott said at 1:57 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Just want to point out that with the transition to 4-3 and Barwin’s status as a potential misfit, there’s literally 0% chance we don’t extend Curry

  440. 440 GermanEagle said at 1:59 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    It all comes down to money, mate.

    Unlike the others Vinny Curry has the most leverage…

  441. 441 Sean Stott said at 2:07 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    They’re simply not going to let him walk. Won’t happen. They’ll sign Curry before they force a Bradford contract.

  442. 442 GermanEagle said at 2:09 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Don’t get me wrong! I love it to happen. But it’s not like a sure shot as some want to believe…

  443. 443 Iskar36 said at 2:12 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I don’t foresee it being a major issue, but what control over that do the Eagles really have? Curry has not been a full time starter since being drafted. Designing a contract that one, is high enough for him to be willing to sign, and two, is low enough that if he turns out to struggle as a starter, we can minimize the lose, is a complicated contract.

    I want Curry here, it certainly sounds like the Eagles want him here, and HOPEFULLY the contract is easy to sign. Still, there absolutely are all the ingredients for this to be a difficult signing.

  444. 444 anon said at 2:16 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    see BG, just did it last year.

  445. 445 Iskar36 said at 2:17 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yea, and that contract didn’t get signed until FA started, and he almost went elsewhere. BG is absolutely a great comparable, but just like BG, it is a complex negotiation.

  446. 446 GermanEagle said at 2:19 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yes I remember all that drama re BG last year!!

  447. 447 anon said at 2:21 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I think it might be same thing this year honestly. I just can’t tell who was in charge of $ last year. The Maclin deal seemed almost bad faith how low that prove it deal was.

    BG there were questions. We made an offer. His agent wanted to let him hit FA, and he did. FA was dry, b/c he’s mediocre, so he came back instead of going to giants.

    Curry is more disruptive i think, but doesn’t play much, I can’t see him having much more success than BG on the FA market (remember too that BG was really effective in 2014)

  448. 448 Eaglesfannn66 said at 4:35 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    This may – possibly be, the type of case where they decide to replace him through the draft. They CAN NOT cash up everyone. They can conceivably trade down in the first round ( pick a OT / G ) and get a second rounder for trading down. Then they still can get a really good, pass rusher prospect, with that second pick. Remember, in Swartz new defense, the ( outside pass rushers ) will only have [ get to the quarterback ] responsibilities. There new ( rush the quarterback ) scheme, is a fairly easy transition for a college player. They are going to have to make ” some ” financially calculated decisions. The big ( urgent ) decisions are : Cox, Curry and Bradford. But, very quickly, they will have to start focusing on extending : S – Jenkins, DT – Logan and ( Kiko ? )

  449. 449 anon said at 4:47 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Agree. The most annoying thing about 34 is that it’s impossible to get stud OLBs in the draft unless you’re drafting really high.

    Must easier to draft a guy that has just rush skills if you’re outside top 10.

  450. 450 Eaglesfannn66 said at 4:55 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Agreed, also was the big issue with Kellys need for a ( Cam Newton type ) quarterback, to run his offense. Makes it – 10 times harder to – find [ specific ] players, and build a team.

  451. 451 anon said at 4:57 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Isn’t the new cam coming out of OSU this year?

  452. 452 Eaglesfannn66 said at 4:14 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Very true, Vinny also probably feels that he never got a fair chance to play up to his abilities. He wants – cash $$$ and respect.

  453. 453 Fufina said at 2:00 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Explaining why the cap hits are going to be much bigger this (and next year).

    Since 2013 we have had a rapidly rising cap going from $123mil to $153mil over 3 years. That is a 25% cap increase, with more to come over the next few years. However there has not been a comparible rise in contracts across the board. Why? because lots of teams have been using these cap rises to get out of being hard against the cap and not being in a situation to really be able to spend. This has suppressed the market and contracts while inflating have not been breaking the structure of those that came before to a significant extent.

    That changes in 2016. per, NFL teams project currently to have $786mil in caps space in 2016, and $1,976 in 2017. There are not enough free agents in the next 2 years to demand $2 billion in cap space at current contracts. That is over $61 million per team. So there is huge demand for players (remember the NFL has a salary floor teams need to meet over a 3 year period of 89% of cap and the league as a whole needs to spend 95%), but hugely restricted supply. Basic economics 101 says there should be a huge increase in the size and scale of contracts over the next 2 years.

    So guys what may seem expensive now is going to look much much much cheaper in the world of 2017 or 2018 when contract could be 30-50% higher than they standardly are now.

  454. 454 BobSmith77 said at 2:02 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Great post and thanks. Helps to explain these 2 deals in perspective.

  455. 455 johhnyblaze said at 2:09 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Swartz says eagles will indeed switch to a 4-3 defense

  456. 456 BobSmith77 said at 2:15 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Not a surprise. The personnel even this year was better suited for a 4-3 too.

  457. 457 GermanEagle said at 2:16 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    F CK!

  458. 458 Joe Minx said at 2:20 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    You don’t like?

  459. 459 GermanEagle said at 2:23 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    F(uck) C(hip) K(elly)!

  460. 460 Joe Minx said at 5:36 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Ah. Didn’t get that at first.

  461. 461 Fufina said at 2:22 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Will be interesting to see how they go about things. There is an arguement that the best way to use the personal is to go to a 4-3 under, allowing Cox and Graham/Curry to attack in base downs, and use some of our 3-4 stalwarts on the other side to block/contain the run.

  462. 462 Nick C said at 2:16 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    My updated off-season plan (it will probably change tomorrow):
    1. Cox is close– good
    2. Curry– We obviously want to keep him. I think we may have waited too long. If we could get out of Barwin’s contract by trading him, it may be a possibility (I really like Barwin but at his price point and he may not start it is difficult). I would like Curry on the BG deal, but apparently the deal we sent Curry was not what his camp expected. He will be overpaid if he hits the open market *see inflated contacts post below*
    3. Non exclusive or transition tag for Bradford. I believe these are the best solution whether you would like to keep Bradford, only wish to keep him at a certain price, or if you want to draft the future QB. Firstly, the transition tag just allows you to match anyone. So one less team to drive his price up (us). If we use the Nonexclusive, we could either trade him or keep him for the year while seeing how he works in the scheme. I don’t buy all that talk about nobody would trade for him. He will be the BEST QB available. This league drastically overvalues QB play (and rightfully so). With the inflated numbers, I can really see him getting that ridiculous 25M that was reported. He will not sign a Kaepernick deal for all you hopefuls.
    4. If we do not tag Bradford, or we are able to trade him : we have some cap room to grab a guard or tackle, and/or maybe a WR (Alshon Jeffery wont hit FA– we all know how nice that would be; Jeffery, Matthews, Ags, Huff)
    5. The MAIN reason I would like to tag Bradford is even if we do want to draft a QB, it gives us the flexibility to do so. If we don’t tag him, everyone knows we are going after Wentz (or whomever); our situation becomes dire, we have to trade up (losing more valuable picks), etc.

    We obviously know all our draft needs and depth needs, but I will wait to post that until I see FA/trades/contract restructures

  463. 463 Eaglesfannn66 said at 4:07 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Barwin and our 4th round pick, for someone’s 2nd rounder, would be huge ! They MUST have a second rounder this year. As a matter of fact, I would do the following : trade down ( 7 – 12 or so ) picks, and get someone’s 2nd rounder. I also would try to move ( any combination of these players and picks *** ) to get another 2nd rounder. *** Barwin, Huff, Cooper [ yeah right ] 3rd or 4th rounder. This draft is supposed to be loaded with really good players – in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

  464. 464 anon said at 4:31 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I’d include Kendricks or Graham in the “trade block” candidates.

  465. 465 ACViking said at 2:17 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Re: The Ertz-Johnson Extensions — Do NOT Reduce 2016 Cap

    Per Sam Lynch . . . which makes perfect math sense, since the “extensions” take effect after 2016 — no “money ball” here:

    Howie isn't reducing 2016/17 cap. It would have cost less cap to leave Johnson/Ertz deals in place, sign in 2017, cut Celek for cheaper TE.— Sam Lynch (@shlynch) January 29, 2016

    Howie is doing these deals for the longer term benefit. This isn't carving out space this year.— Sam Lynch (@shlynch) January 29, 2016

  466. 466 Nick C said at 2:23 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    With the numbers reported in those deals, I was thinking there is no way without creating ridiculous back-loaded contracts (which they wouldn’t sign) to reduce the cap this year. I’m not so high on the contracts as well. Celek is still overpaid. Johnson is being paid for potential instead of his actual position, and Ertz seems a little high but I can live with it. I guess this inflated cap is really going to balloon these contracts.

  467. 467 Fufina said at 2:26 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    There is no way to create cap this year, since the rookie deals are virtually at the floor of wage scale regardless of how you structure them.

    signing bonus will add $1.5-2mil to the salary cap for each deal done. Not a big addition but it all adds up.

  468. 468 Nick C said at 2:27 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I was thinking the same thing. I just was reading some articles this morning about how these deals are creating cap space for us… and thinking, umm. HOW!?

  469. 469 Fufina said at 2:31 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Celek’s deal created 1-2 mil in space, basically offsetting Ertz’s cap hit in 2016. so i think thats what people were thinking of and attributed Celek’s small cap saving to all the other deals (generally extensions save money in the years cap unless they are rookie non 1st round pick extensions).

  470. 470 Nick C said at 2:34 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Mclane tweeted that these deals clear “16-17M” in space.

  471. 471 Fufina said at 2:40 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Means space in the years 2016 and 2017.

  472. 472 Nick C said at 2:42 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I just cant see that as possible. You have to prorate and add the signing bonus. How could he lessen the deal without creating a contract no one would sign?

  473. 473 Fufina said at 2:49 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Well they still get paid with a signing bonus… it is just that the cap hit is spread over up to 5 years. He is wrong however. Celek saved about $1.5mil, but Ertz added that back on and Lanes deal adds $2mil to cap as well probably.

  474. 474 Nick C said at 2:51 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That is what i figured. I was reading the tweet wrong. McLane was saying space for years 2016-2017; I was reading it as 16-17M in space. For some reason it wasn’t clicking. WOW

  475. 475 Eaglesfannn66 said at 3:59 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    These moves / extensions – are NOT ( 2016 / 2017 ) cap space moves. They are – long range ( as Lurie requested), ” vision “, moves. They are building for the [ long term ] future, of the organization. After …. I repeat, after they conclude the – long range moves ( Ertz, Celek, Johnson, Curry, etc. ), then they will focus on – short term ( 2016 ) moves – such as ( DeMeco Ryans, Riely Cooper, Marcus Smith, etc. ) Note ** There is also a [ draft ] equation, that’s factored into the ( future ) strategy. Example – Drafting players ( for specific positions ) to be prepared, for – free agency ( losses / moves. ) The most successful teams ( Panthers, Seahawks, Cardinals, Steelers, etc. ) are extremely successful at : drafting players to replace – high priced veterans or players wanting huge contract extensions. This is what people within the NFL’s, front offices / league, call – ( cheap labor. ) The teams that are ” consistently ” top tier teams, have a very good ratio of – high priced / quality starters and – low cost ( emerging ) starters / back ups.

  476. 476 ACViking said at 2:55 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    clear now


  477. 477 anon said at 2:43 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    i think he meant space in 2016 and 2017.

  478. 478 ACViking said at 2:50 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    McLane tweeted that.

    But gave no explanation for how he got there.

    And with the Johnson and Ertz extensions taking effect in 2017 — while leaving intact their rookie contracts — there’s no way any money could come off the 2016 cap.

    No money ball here. These deals are about the future. . .

    Sam Lynch sure thinks so.

  479. 479 Eaglesfannn66 said at 3:33 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    No …. He suggested – cap space ” IN ” the ” years ” of – 2016 / 2017.

  480. 480 Nick C said at 5:39 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Classic mixup that I realized shortly after.

  481. 481 FairOaks said at 7:34 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    For someone like cox, you could convert his 2016 salary into a signing bonus to reduce 2016 cap (at expense of later caps). It’s not something the Eagles normally do but it is at least possible.

  482. 482 laeagle said at 3:57 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    The Celek contract cleared up money for this year.

  483. 483 Nick C said at 2:37 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I don’t see this as possible. So many contradicting reports and reporters with no accountability (Ironic huh?):

  484. 484 anon said at 2:41 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I think he’d walked back these comments after sam lynch comments.

  485. 485 A_T_G said at 2:50 PM on January 29th, 2016:


  486. 486 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:49 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    If you havent checked out this mornings Jim Schwartz interview with Angelo Cataldi, give it a listen, some good stuff From Schwartz made it bearable to listen to a cataldi interview..
    Schwartz is trying to talk about what he wants to change without ripping the previous regime, but it’s pretty obvious he doesn’t have much respect for how the previous regime used the defensive Talent which is spmething he sounds like Genuinly attracted him to this job.. He tries to answer questions without ripping the previous regime so he says stuff like, trying to put guys in a little better positipn to use their talent. He flat out said that we won’t be running a 2-gap 3-4, and when it came to the Deal he talked bout “Taking their handcuffs off and unleashing them” to me that sounds like he wasn’t a fan of chip forcing a two gap 3-4 on our collection of deenaive talent.
    Angelo asked bout how it had to feel great to have his defenders carry him off the field which is something you don’t see very often with Coordinators, but he spoke on how that was a great feeling, and it was just a testament to the close Bonds he was able to form with his defenders, which im sure is music to fans ears after how chip allegedly botched the bonding and relationship building. Whats more impressive is its not like Schwartz had coached those defenders for years. Seem to Buld that bond and chemistry quickily.
    It was an interesting interview, he spoke pretty openly, and he was generous with his time, getting into detail and stayed on the air until Angelo asked every question he had.
    Schwartz FIRE as a DC should Play well in this city who adored the mean old bastard Jim Johnson. I look forward to seeing an aggressive defense THATS always in Attack mode, and doesn’t have to blitz to generate pressure

  487. 487 RC5000 said at 3:51 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Interesting, Foles has a 6 million dollar roster bonus and 1.75 million salary guarantee due in March. Don’t know what they’re going to do. Renegotiate, let him walk?

  488. 488 GermanEagle said at 3:55 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That’s the Rams’ problem. not ours! Thankfully!!!

  489. 489 Fufina said at 4:06 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Foles as our placeholder QB while we develop a QB underneath him? Who says no!

    Seriously tho, he is so getting cut, and it might legit make sense to bring him back as our stand in QB, he knows the players, knows an Andy scheme and would troll the fuck out of Chip. Makes too much sense for a Howie move.

    fuck it i am back on the Foles train. Announcing departure from the station in 20 minutes, all those who want to ‘early’ adopt come jump in with me.

  490. 490 GermanEagle said at 4:08 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Lol. I just broke my leg when trying to jump on your bandwagon…

  491. 491 Will:↑↑↓↓←→←→BA said at 4:20 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I hope that train derails

  492. 492 Greg Richards said at 4:29 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Build a time machine and bring back 2013 Foles and I’m on board.

  493. 493 Julescat said at 4:56 PM on January 29th, 2016:

  494. 494 ACViking said at 7:28 PM on January 29th, 2016:


    One of the all-time great shows.

    Now kids get crap like Sponge Bob. SMH!

  495. 495 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:53 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Im not a fan of the process and path we took to get to this point, but the coaching staff is starting to grow on me. Although im pretty easy to please, give me a top DC who will bring back a true philly style defense and I will be happy, and out of the DC names thrown around, Schwartz was one of the established bigger names to hand the defense over to..
    Hopefully Schwartz has success, while remaining our DC for 3-5 years, instead of whipping our defense back into shape and leaving in a year or two for q HC job

  496. 496 ACViking said at 3:55 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Re: “K” for Contract

    Regular commenter Anon has introduced the shorthand “K” when discussing “contracts.”

    Once seen, regular commenter RobNE “outed” Anon as a lawyer.

    So, it’s been asked, why the letter “K” for contract?

    In law school, you learn quickly that law professors use Greek letters to denote plaintiffs and defendants.

    Plaintiff — starting with the hard “p” sound — is denoted by π.

    Defendants — starting with the “d” sound — gets a Δ.

    But there’s no Greek letter that sounds like a hard “c” as in “contract” . . .

    So — at meeting of law professors many centuries ago that was probably not too unlike the Counsel of Nicaea — the letter “K” was chosen for “Contract.”

    And that’s how Anon came to use the letter “K” when talking contracts.

    That’s my argument. And I’m stickin’ to it.

  497. 497 GermanEagle said at 4:01 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Lol. Great post. Can we use the letter K for c**** too?! 😉 My former landlady is a K, as she wants to keep almost 2 grand from my security deposit. What a K!!!

  498. 498 RobNE said at 4:34 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    sounds like you need a lawyer. I hear Anon is one.

  499. 499 RobNE said at 4:38 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    you say wants to keep, like has not happened yet. How long since you moved out? in some states like Mass. you have a very limited (I think 30 days) time frame for landlord to write tenant, give detailed reasons and amount withheld. If you miss the deadline, you cannot withhold.

    If you tell us the time frame and the state, this is easy to look up.

  500. 500 ACViking said at 4:39 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    the Igglesblitz legal team . . . a formidable bunch

  501. 501 RobNE said at 5:33 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Better call Saul

  502. 502 GermanEagle said at 4:46 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Moved out on 15 January. Landlord failed to show up for handover meeting on the day after. Now we are getting charged for painting the walls, scratches on wooden floor and a dirty stove.

    New York.

  503. 503 RobNE said at 4:51 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Under New York law, a landlord must return the tenant’s security deposit within a reasonable time after the tenant has surrendered the rental property to the landlord–that is, returned the keys and vacated the property. What’s “reasonable” would ultimately be up to a small claims court judge (should a deposit dispute end up in court), but it typically means a window of 21 to 45 days.

    Jan. 15th is not long ago. But you could push on the fact that she missed the meeting and therefore took away your chance to discuss things with her (though meeting does not seem required). I’d go to small claims court, just be a pain. that’s often 80% of the battle.

  504. 504 Bert's Bells said at 4:59 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure this is housing court which skews heavily in favor of the tenant in NYC.

  505. 505 RobNE said at 5:10 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Ok go there even better

  506. 506 GermanEagle said at 5:20 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I’ll take that K to court. It’s not only about money, it’s also become personal!!!

  507. 507 RobNE said at 5:33 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I’d wait a few days hopefully new tenants move in then file. Did she send pics? Don’t ask for any just wondering.

  508. 508 GermanEagle said at 6:43 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    The thing is she’s moving in by herself. That’s why she has kicked us out in the first place.

    I’ve asked for pics of the wall before any repair and painting was done and she said she didn’t have any! Stupid K!

  509. 509 Donald Kalinowski said at 7:17 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    If he takes this case to small claims court, who is ultimately responsible for proving whether or not the walls were damaged?

  510. 510 Bert's Bells said at 4:57 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    This is why New York renters never pay last month rent.

  511. 511 GermanEagle said at 5:19 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yes I know now! But we moved out within 2 weeks after paying half the month rent already. Next time I will know better!

  512. 512 Bert's Bells said at 4:58 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Also, 311 her ass. The city takes that shit for reals.

  513. 513 GermanEagle said at 5:18 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    What do you mean with 311?

  514. 514 Bert's Bells said at 7:48 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    It’s the sort of the all purpose city complaint line.

    They’re best for things like “no heat”. If you call and tell them you don’t have heat -they’ve got an inspector there the next day. They’ll get you in contact with the proper people at the housing department who will get the city on the landlord.

    They take this stuff seriously.

  515. 515 Bert's Bells said at 4:55 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Alright, Matlock, why do they use the “K” in baseball for strikeout?

  516. 516 ACViking said at 7:32 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Easy one.

    There’s 4 letters on each side of the “K” in strikeout.

    It was a compromise between the American and National league teams.

    Not the first letter, “S”. And not the last letter, “T”.

    About all the leagues could agree on, along with a world series.

  517. 517 Greg Richards said at 4:33 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Not sure if this has been mentioned, tried to find it, but JLC confirmed we have interviewed Morocco Brown for the director of player personnel job.

  518. 518 Mitchell said at 4:36 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I wouldnt say 90%. Were a smart bunch here.

  519. 519 Eaglesfannn66 said at 4:38 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    True, no disrespect intended. Just wanted to use a big number.

  520. 520 Fufina said at 4:40 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Ok guys hear me out on Foles 2016 Eagles QB…

    Bradford is going to be expensive, and while there are scenario’s where i can see him coming back – agrees 1 year deal with no tag clause if no really great situation/offer seems available, i think in all likelihood he is not going to be an Eagles player next year.

    If you let Bradford walk you need a QB long term, no one in free agency is attractive with any long term upside (maybe RGKnee?). Draft is where i would like to go but both Wentz/Paxton ideally would have a year riding the pine (doubt Goff will be available at 13). So we need a QB to stand in. Sanchize is taking you nowhere and costs $5.5mil + escalators in his deal if he is starting games in 2016 so is expensive and offers no future or value.

    Which brings us to Foles…. he is getting cut by Rams – no way they pay $8.75mil for a QB that they benched for Case Keenum for, when they have an out in March before all of it becomes guaranteed. However he makes a lot of sense for the birds over any other free agent QB. He knows Doug from 2012, where he made real improvement and developed in the last few games with Andy. He knows the players and has good relationships with most of the guys on and off the field. He knows the west coast scheme from 2012 and looked decent in it (for a rookie). He is a guy who would handle the philly media and would be a solider taking the heat from fans screaming for the rookie QB. If you pick up his contract you do not suffer with loosing comp picks in 2017 (depends hugely on FA plans the team has but could be a big consideration). Foles does have upside… he has shown he can catch on fire at times if he has a good OL and running game which is more than pretty much any guy in free agency have shown.

    And it would be a final fuck you to Chip gift rapped by Howie Roseman.

  521. 521 Insomniac said at 4:41 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    No thanks.

  522. 522 Bert's Bells said at 4:54 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Your first five words bring back memories of the glory days of TATE.

  523. 523 robspassky said at 5:25 PM on January 29th, 2016:


  524. 524 anon said at 4:57 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Chip made that hard decision for us. We obviously all thought he was better than he was.

  525. 525 RobNE said at 5:09 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Why pick up his contract?

  526. 526 RC5000 said at 6:08 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    You don’t pick up his contract if he’s released before guarantee and bonus kicks in. Why would you pay him that much money really?

    Foles has a 6 million dollar roster bonus and 1.75 million salary guarantee due in March.

  527. 527 A_T_G said at 8:11 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I think the statement was made that picking up his contract makes it so he doesn’t count as a free agent signing for comp pick calculations. Basically, you are choosing to overpay in order to improve your comp pick chances.

  528. 528 ACViking said at 7:23 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Stranger things have happened.

    The first question is, will Bradford ink to a long-term deal w/ the Eagles.

    By “Long Term,” I mean a 4-5 year deal. A legit 4-5 year deal.

    Not some *fantasy* 2-year — but called 5-year — contract that lets the Eagles out if they want.

    Bradford wants *stability*. He’s said as much.

    Why on earth would he agree to a deal with the Ealges where he willingly losses control and puts himself in position of having to look for another team, and a new system, in two years?

    Answer? Bradford wouldn’t — not without testing Free Agency (and coming back here in a Brandon Graham scenario, unless the Eagles have already gone in another direction).

    So that leads to Q#2 . . . if Bradford wants to test FA, what do the Eagles do?

    Sit around and wait for Bradford to surrender?

    Doubtful. If Bradford tests Free Agency, he’s in all likelihood gone (save the BG scenario). Tag and trade is possible, but complicated and risky (for reasons Greg Richards has explained).

    Now with Bradford’s testing FA:

    – what does that mean for the Eagles drafting a QB in Rd 1?
    – who baby sits the QB job a la the 1999 Eagles . . . Sanchez, Chase Daniels, or possible Nick Foles?

    Not easy stuff.

    So who wants Howie Roseman’s job?

  529. 529 FairOaks said at 7:40 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Not easy but I’m not sure he’s at the point where he has earned a contract which pretty much ties him to a team for 4+ years. I don’t think any team will risk that.

    Also if the Eagles tag him, the choice is a one year deal or a 2-3 year deal. If the Eagles do not trade tn that scenario then he really can’t find out a true market value.

  530. 530 ACViking said at 7:44 PM on January 29th, 2016:


    Your first point I agree with.

    But Bradford may learn that for himself only by hitting FA . . . which creates a load of uncertainty for the Eagles.

    Though you’d think his agent, Condon, knows the score.

    Second point. That may be the route to go, though some risks attach.

    Great comment, by the way.

  531. 531 anon said at 8:09 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Testing FA may not be great idea for him, we’ll have to see what happens when Fitz / Cousins gets paid. Guys that are likely getting less than we’re assuming bradford would get (Fitz, Hoyer if houston keeps him, McCown) have put up better numbers than Bradford in the last year – even using his good 6 weeks and have – had better career seasons. So why would anyone take bradford, whose got more injury history than any of those guys, and less production than most at 20+ per year?

    Plus we have options:
    Chase one a prove it.
    Foles on a prove it

  532. 532 anon said at 5:10 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    “Jason Peters is probably the best tackle of all time, one of them.” – LJ. Wasn’t he just saying a few weeks ago that it was time for JP to move over and he was over the hill but didn’t know?

  533. 533 anon said at 5:47 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Chiefs signed TE Travis Kelce to a five-year, $46 million extension through 2021. he deal comes with $20.5 million guaranteed.
    Zach Ertz signed to a five-year, $42.5 million extension through 2021.

  534. 534 Insomniac said at 5:59 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Gronk’s contract looks like a huge steal now.

  535. 535 anon said at 6:08 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Gronk: 6 year, $54,000,000 contract with the New England Patriots, including a
    $8,000,000 signing bonus, $12,920,000 guaranteed, and an average
    annual salary of $9,000,000. Looks like almost $3m a year is structured as bonuses (workout, option, roster)

    I think that was signed prior to this season right?

  536. 536 Insomniac said at 6:11 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I think this was like 3 years ago?

  537. 537 Anders said at 7:14 AM on January 30th, 2016:

    Look for Eifert to beat that number and Reed try to get over as well

  538. 538 unhinged said at 7:29 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    In a calculation re: how best to go forward, the question of whether to pay or not pay SB seems pretty simple. Pay him a nice signing bonus, a fair market price that his agent will not laugh at, but don’t make it for more than four years. In four years, if the braintrust at NCC cannot locate a promising successor, then find a new braintrust. Meanwhile, the NY Giants have proven that a less-than- stellar QB on a team with a ferocious DL can still capture the flag. Jeff Lurie just hired an astute pass rush tactician, and now Lurie heeds to give him whatever he says he needs to put the Eagles in the Superbowl conversation. Our OL is obviously in need of talent, and our DL is not bad, but not great either. This is a quandary befitting diligent scouting, and it should be doable. Get Bradford the protection and run support (blockers) that has been lacking, and by all and any means get a scary DL that gives the Eagles a chance in every game. The obsession with franchise QB is not a joke, but it need not be an excuse for being ordinary if you don’t have one. A franchise DL with a decent QB trumps a franchise QB with a run-of-the-mill DL. We’ve now got a “decent” QB, and we have a foundation at DL to build on. Investing in the status quo will yield predictable results. We need what Buddy Ryan lovingly referred to as “assassins” on the DL and we need to go get them now.

  539. 539 Insomniac said at 7:36 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Eli might not be one of the best regular season QB but he has had two elite qualities shine in the playoffs. Luck and clutchness. Bradford doesn’t have those qualities.

  540. 540 ACViking said at 7:41 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    One other thing.

    The guy’s never missed a game.

  541. 541 Insomniac said at 7:45 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yup. He’s also the Patriots slayer. Who would have thought that goofy ass Eli would be Tom Brady’s kryptonite.

  542. 542 ACViking said at 7:47 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Isn’t that crazy?

    The guy owns Belichick and Brady.

  543. 543 Insomniac said at 8:10 PM on January 29th, 2016:

  544. 544 ACViking said at 7:39 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    That’s a cogent, persuasive argument.

    And in just 26 words, you described the Roseman Challenge:

    “Pay him [Bradford] a nice signing bonus, a fair market price that his agent will not laugh at, but don’t make it for more than four years.”

  545. 545 A_T_G said at 8:06 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Cogent? Persuasive? Impossible.

    Unhinged didn’t use a single profanity, word in all caps or rushed typo. On top of that, he only stated each point a single time.

    Clearly, unhinged does not feel strongly about his argument. Therefore, he must be wrong.

  546. 546 GermanEagle said at 7:47 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    LJ has 20m fully gtd money at signing. Slightly less the Tyron Smith. 4th highest paid T in NFL. Boom

  547. 547 ACViking said at 7:48 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Any word on the allocation of that $20M?

    How much as a signing bonus vs. roster bonus vs. gtd salary?

  548. 548 Greg Richards said at 7:56 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    $10M signing bonus. Keep in mind that that Tyron Smith extension happened 18 months ago, so cap inflation has to be taken into account.

  549. 549 Anders said at 7:13 AM on January 30th, 2016:

    So we pretty much just gave him his 5th year bonus in signing bonus instead?

  550. 550 anon said at 8:02 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    Yeah but it’s not really “new money” after 2016 salary and 2017 tag year it’s only $6m guaranteed after that. Obviously in that argument you’d have to assume we’d use the tag.

  551. 551 GermanEagle said at 8:45 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    U the lawyer right?!

  552. 552 anon said at 8:18 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    “Not that long ago (in the grand scheme of things), the Eagles liked
    to target young players for long-term extensions that pay good money now
    — but that ultimately ended up compensating the player well below the
    top of the market. The contracts given to tackle Lane Johnson
    conjures memories of deals that ultimately resulted in acrimony, once
    the players fell far behind their peers on the compensatory pecking

    The best (worst) example came 10 years ago, when the Eagles signed guard Shawn Andrews through the 2015 season.

    Johnson, a first-round pick in 2013, became eligible for a new contract once the 2015 regular season ended. With one year left on his rookie deal and a six-year deal, Johnson is now under contract through 2021.

    The market will change dramatically over the course of a deal that
    reportedly pays Johnson $35.5 million guaranteed, with a maximum value
    of $63 million. Whatever the details of the deal (and they’ll eventually
    be made available), there’s a chance that, by 2018 or 2019, Johnson
    won’t be as thrilled with his contract as he currently is — especially
    as he prepares to become the team’s full-time left tackle, a more valuable position than playing on the right side.” PFT

  553. 553 anon said at 8:19 PM on January 29th, 2016:

    I think this sort of eloquently explains the downside of the howie deal structure which you end up seeing play out when chip was here. Best interesting to see how Howie deals with that deal once it becomes undermarket (probably in 2 years)

  554. 554 Anders said at 7:12 AM on January 30th, 2016:

    Wait PFT brought up Shawn Andrews, a guy who was cut because of clinic depression and chronic backpain?

    The two most recent are McCoy and Jackson, but great chance both would still be here if Reid or someone not named Kelly was the HC.

    Deals like this is designed to be renegotiated before the last 1-2 years because the base salary gets extremely high with almost no bonus money.

    Its also in the last few years a good chunk of the guaranteed money is, in terms of guaranteed base salary.