Developing QBs

Posted: February 15th, 2016 | Author: | Filed under: Philadelphia Eagles | 300 Comments »

Andy Reid developed Donovan McNabb and AJ Feeley. He tried to develop Kevin Kolb. He spent one year working with Nick Foles. Reid did good work with veteran QBs as well. Jeff Garcia had his second best QB rating under Reid. Michael Vick grew quite a bit as a passer while playing for Reid.

Reid learned about QB play in a couple of key places. He was at BYU when that was a QB factory. Lavell Edwards and Norm Chow knew how to develop QBs. Edwards produced Steve Young, Jim McMahon, Marc Wilson and Ty Detmer. Chow worked with Philip Rivers and Carson Palmer after leaving BYU.

Reid also learned a lot from Mike Holmgren while in Green Bay. Holmgren learned from the master himself, Bill Walsh. Holmgren then taught what he knew to coaches like Steve Mariucci, Marty Mornhinweg, Jon Gruden and Reid.

BYU had a system for teaching and developing QBs. So did Walsh/Holmgren. It wasn’t simply getting a really talented player and putting him on the field. Both groups ran an offensive system that QBs could thrive in. They also taught the QBs how to play. There was a real mixture of X’s and O’s and QB skills. Calling the perfect play doesn’t do you any good if the QB can’t execute it. Just the same, a gifted player needs the right scheme to help maximize his talent.

Reid had good teachers. He took that knowledge and used it to teach his QBs.

Doug Pederson played for Reid in Green Bay and Philly. He worked for Reid in Philly and KC. Pederson also got to learn from Holmgren. That’s a lot of invaluable experience. Pederson did good work in KC, but now gets a chance to be a QB guru on his own.  I wrote about that and QB development for

Pederson must get better QB play in 2016 than the Eagles did in the past 2 years. He also needs to find a long term solution to the Eagles QB situation. That’s more than just drafting a QB in the first round. That player must be developed.

Pederson was Nick Foles quarterback coach in 2012, his rookie season. Pederson helped teach him the West Coast offense that the Eagles ran back then. Pederson worked Foles on mechanics and footwork. The plan was to develop Foles for the future. Michael Vick got hurt in the preseason and that accelerated things. Foles started a couple of preseason games. He finished with a rating of 110 and threw six touchdowns and only two interceptions. Pederson was a good teacher and Foles was a quick learner.

Foles started six games as a rookie. He went 1-5, but the whole team struggled that year. Foles completed 61 percent of his throws and had six touchdown passes. With the Rams in 2015, Foles started 11 games, going 4-7. He threw seven touchdowns and completed just 56 percent of his passes. He regressed from where he was as a rookie.

Pederson worked with Aaron Murray the past 2 years. He was a mid-round pick of the Chiefs in 2014. Murray showed definitive progress from the 2014 preseason to last summer. He has yet to get on the field in the regular season, but might be the Chiefs primary backup in 2016.

There is no star pupil so far, but Pederson has shown that he can help develop QBs. The Eagles will be his biggest challenge by far, since this is Pederson’s first time as the head QB guru. He also has a wide open situation right now. If the Eagles bring back Sam Bradford (or bring in some other proven veteran), that would lessen the challenge.

How well Pederson handles the QB situation will go a long way to determining how successful a head coach he is. You can’t win without good QB play.


The Eagles are going to have a lot of options at QB. We’ve talked about the draft prospects a bit so let’s focus on veteran players.

Chase Daniel – Worked with Pederson the past 3 years in KC. Was a backup in New Orleans before that. Has some physical limitations, but is a smart veteran. He is a free agent and would likely jump at the chance to start in Philly.

Aaron Murray – Eagles would have to trade for him. Completely unproven in the NFL, but Pederson could love him based on their time together. Murray was a very good player at Georgia.

Brock Osweiler – Up and down for Denver, but showed enough promise that they seem to want to keep him. Doesn’t seem like the kind of guy Pederson would want for his offense, but that’s just a guess. Free agent, but won’t come cheap.

Colin Kaepernick – Has a lot of the traits that Pederson would want in a QB, but also comes with baggage. Probably a long shot, but don’t completely rule him out. Things weren’t good the last couple of years, but remember that a few years ago Kap played at a high level and looked potentially special. Lots of strange stuff happened in SF. Kap had a hand in some of that, but coaches, management and ownership also were highly erratic.

RGIII – The great mystery man. Did amazing things as a rookie. Since then, his career has been nothing but injuries and controversy. I think putting him in a new environment could make a world of difference. That said, there are no guarantees he’ll ever get back to what he was.

Nick Foles – We’ve already talked about him. Foles would be of interest as a short term starter if the price was right. No one sees him as a long term solution.

Ryan Fitzpatrick – I get the feeling he’ll stay in NY. He’s coming off a career best year and has a tight connection with OC Chan Gailey. If he and the Jets can’t agree on money, would be worth considering, but then you’d have the issue of not wanting to pay too much for him.

A.J. McCarron – The Bengals have him under contract for 2 more years. McCarron played well as Andy Dalton’s replacement this year. Some team could talk to the Bengals about him, but would likely have to overpay for him in a trade. The Eagles once got a 2nd round pick for A.J. Feeley. McCarron is interesting, but I don’t think he is worth a high pick.

Before you dismiss some of these guys because you didn’t like the way they played in the last couple of years, remember that Blaine Gabbert just had the best season of his career. A change of scenery may have saved his career. Kirk Cousins just had a breakout season after looking below average for the previous 3 years. Some guys need change to jump start things. Other players need time. If a QB has shown big time ability at some point, he is worth considering.

There are plenty of guys I don’t think the Eagles will have any interest in. Some of the big names are:

Geno Smith
E.J. Manuel
Johnny Manziel

Smith and Manuel have never shown much promise in the NFL. Manziel…that should be pretty obvious.


300 Comments on “Developing QBs”

  1. 1 Developing QBs - said at 5:57 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    […] Tommy Lawlor Andy Reid developed Donovan McNabb and AJ Feeley. He tried to develop Kevin Kolb. He spent one year […]

  2. 2 Nick C said at 5:59 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    This is a reply I had to Geagle on our previous thread but I’ll post it here. This time of year is so SLOWWW:

    Like I said, I have been on the non-exclusive tag game the whole time. Doesn’t give him an opportunity to leave unless we decide to trade him. 18-20M is not unreasonable for the tag seeing as he will get at least that on the open market. The cap is up to at least 155M+ our carryover. Given our obvious cuts that we will make, we have more than enough to retain Sam and still be flexible to make some other small moves. With a few other cuts or trades, we would be even more flexible to make some larger moves. This is a no-brainer to me. Even for those who want to draft a QB, we can still do that if a guy we like is there early. Or go the late-round prospect route.

    To play devil’s advocate for the Sam Bradford haters for a minute. I hear many of them saying that a contract with Sam Bradford will set us back 5 years and other ridiculous sentiments. This is a year by year league with non-guaranteed contracts. The contract Sam will get will probably only have significant guaranteed money into about year 3 or so. With the cap space available now and the rising cap the next few years, these players are going to be getting some ridiculous contracts. I just love when people who know nothing about the NFL’s cap or contracts try and comment on value.

    Back to the franchise tag: I said I considered it a no-brainer because I do. I do not really wish to use the transition tag. But for some reason our Front Office has been reluctant to use the tag ever since the Corey Simon situation (you could even substitute the word ‘scared’ here). So at the very least I would use the transition tag so we at least do not enter the bidding war. One less team to drive the price up. So once again I would personally take away the leverage and give ourselves options in the draft and trades by use the non exclusive franchise tag, but I believe it would be completely irresponsible to not use the transition tag.

  3. 3 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:09 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    In year 3 of the deal, Bradfords contract will become a bargain with how QB pay is trending.. Two years from now, 20 of 30 Qbs will be making 20mil plus..20mil will become standard QB pay
    Hopefully we can sigń SAM before the Colts announce Lucks extension. Their wacko owner is raving about how Crazy the numbers in Lucks deal will be..

  4. 4 Fufina said at 6:17 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Well unless he continues to be bad, have a rookie we drafted at some point come in and take his place while we continue to pay him $20mil a year while letting players like Jenkins and Logan leave because we do not have the cap space for them…

  5. 5 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:20 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    As if We ever lose playërs we want to keep because we don’t have money under Roseman… Re negotiate a contract or two next year, convert some salary to signing bonus, Cut expensive older players, and plenty other contract gymnastics and they will find the money to extend playërs we draft..

  6. 6 Fufina said at 6:24 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    We have not lost players we wanted to keep (except Maclin), because we have not had enough good players to keep.

    The problem with pushing money down the line is it is harder to resign people early when you are close to the cap, so instead of extending Logan/Jenkins in 2016, you let them hit FA in 2017 and need to compete in a cash rich player poor free agency window, and then you can get into Maclin situations, where someone offers Logan $14mil a year and you are just not willing to match it.

  7. 7 Nick C said at 6:35 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    If we extended Jenkins this off-season, it will probably lower his cap hit this year. That leaves one player that might hit Free agency next year in Bennie Logan. Bennie Logan may not be in the cards. Let’s put this as an opportunity cost. We will already be devoting around 15M to Cox. If we get someone in the draft this year to replace Logan next year, it would be ideal. Does Bennie really deserve 12-14M a year? How much of his play is a result of Cox being right next to him?

    Bottom line: I would much rather have Bradford and Cox, than Logan and Cox, but I don’t think we will even have to make that decision. The cap seems to be rising 10+M each year. Most SUCCESSFUL teams can never keep ALL of their free agents, which is why you have to draft well. But hitting on a DT is much easier than hitting on a QB.

  8. 8 FairOaks said at 6:41 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    We tagged DeSean, Vick, and LJ Smith since we tagged Simon.

    The problem with Bradford is that he hasn’t earned the full franchise tag number, and I don’t think the Eagles want to pay that. There is a very real risk that if you tag him, he wagers on himself and plays at that salary, hoping for an even bigger long-term deal next year — the cap would represent the most money he could make *this* year, and he’s banked enough dough that he may be OK risking another year. That would be rather punishing on our cap situation this year.

    Of course, he’d probably prefer to not have the tag so he gets his choice of team, so his agent may be bluffing with demands right now too.

  9. 9 Nick C said at 6:58 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    This is where our opinions differ. The tag is currently at 18.5M (it could rise by another million or so). I think that is the floor of his negotiations. He could get 20-23M from Houston or Denver and his agent is widely known as a get all you can and don’t give a discount type of guy. Why Sam Bradford needs that after his ridiculous rookie contract that he never lived up to– I will never know. It is hard to imagine that there are not more QBs like Brady, if they just realized they would have a better chance of seeing their entire contract money by having a lower cap figure and better team around them.

    Anyways I digress. I have no problem paying SB 18.5 for one year and drafting a QB or seeing Sam another year post-injury. Even if you could get him to sign a multi-year deal averaging 16M or so (which I think we would have already done); I would much rather pay that extra 2M and not be on the hook for several years instead of one.

  10. 10 Fufina said at 7:06 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    With cap rising up to 155-157 now i think the caculation for the QB non exclusive tag will come in at about $20mil exactly.

  11. 11 Nick C said at 7:19 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    at 155M, we currently have 26.1M in cap space. Which is increased from what was originally expected. This is before cuts, trades, and more extensions. We are fine.

  12. 12 FairOaks said at 10:18 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    We would have room for Bradford plus rookies at that rate — so any improvements would have to come from cuts. And while we would get some space from cutting Sproles, Sanchez, and Ryans, those all create holes which would cost money to fill — and none of them are no-brainers. The only no-brainer move has been made. We also might still want to re-sign a couple of our own guys to extensions — there is very little wiggle room if Bradford signs the franchise tender.

    It may still be a worthy gamble. But it’s a tough decision. It’s much easier when you know the long-term contract would be in that same range, but Bradford’s won’t — he’s a bit less than that range. The cap number last year for QBs was 18.5 million; I doubt it stayed flat (and will likely jump a lot next year again).

  13. 13 Donald Kalinowski said at 6:00 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    I don’t agree with the idea of overpaying for Bradford or reaching for a QB in the 1st round. To me, bringing in Colin Kaepernick or RG3 is worth a shot.

    I’m not a big fan of bringing in Fitzpatrick, he’s 33. I’d rather have a losing season at the hands of the QB with potential than a winning season with a QB that won’t be here in 2 years.

    Daniel, McCarron, Foles, Osweiler – wouldn’t be thrilled with those guys, but wouldn’t hate it either.

  14. 14 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:08 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    DEAD SERIOUS, Id Rather have THAD Lewis and Sanchez… Talking about the possibility of Rg3 and Kapernicks Makes we want to give SAM 30Million a year!

  15. 15 Charlie Kelly said at 6:21 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    no way, you are out of your mind. id take rg3 and kap over sanchez and thad lewis. all day everyday!! sanchez is the worst

    thad isnt even worthy of mentioning

  16. 16 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:29 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Lol silly… Keep thinking arm strength and leg speed makes a QB… You are talking about grossly under developed QB minds, It’s bad enough when your QB isn’t a real Leader like McNabbs flaw.. But when you are talking about Anti Leaders at the QB position, Nothing else should matter, what more do you need to know?
    All the money KAp was paid, as bad as he played he had the audacity to stop talkng To his teammates and coaches? That’s the guy you will let play the most important leadership in pro Sports and replace the QB our locker room accepted as its natural leader? Lol stop it

  17. 17 Charlie Kelly said at 6:39 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    sanchez sucks thad sucks.

    kap and rg3 are better talents and pederson knows QBs. kap was good under harbaugh. il take the potential over somebody with zero potential (sanchez and thad) its thats easy

  18. 18 Kaedwon said at 6:33 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    You obviously never watched Kaep or RG their last couple seasons. They were wretched. RG in particular has no legs anymore, is locker room cancer and uncoachable. Just no.

  19. 19 Charlie Kelly said at 12:16 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    dude, did you watch sanchez?? lol maybe you didnt.

    id take rg3 and kap over him all day!! so would any logical football mind.

  20. 20 Buge Halls said at 7:21 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    We’ve seen two years in a row now that Sanchez can’t win games. Thad Lewis is a complete unknown. RGKnee or Kap are both worlds better than either one of our backup schlubbs!

  21. 21 Media Mike said at 4:54 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Colin Kaepernick or RG3 is worth a shot.

    No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no.



  22. 22 Anders said at 5:06 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I cant wait for us to sign RG3 and draft Prescott or Boykin.

  23. 23 Media Mike said at 5:14 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    That would be putrid. Like the whole front office and anybody who cheered in that type of garbage should put a gun in their mouth and pull the trigger bad.

    Those guys are hot crap. F them and the whole f-ing style.

    Rooting for those clowns on the Eagles is equivalent to living in France in the 7th Century AD and rooting for Moors to get past Charles Martel and end Western Civilization.

    NOT FUNNY. I don’t want that type of garbage play at QB on the field for my team. EVER.

  24. 24 Ben said at 1:13 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    RGME? Kaep? Foles ??? THAD?!?!?!? Good God. After reading these comments I have fallen back in love with Bradford and it’s not even close.

  25. 25 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:05 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    “A lot of Options?”…. I see like one or two names on that list that could be considered an Option… The rest is pretty depressing…
    Chase Daniels is fine if he is replacing Sanchez as our backüp.. Keeping both those QB’s with a ceiling Of a backüp makes no sense..
    The Aaron Murray/AJ McCarron types Are THAD Lewis level replacements
    Rg3 and Kapernick better not be be considered Options!!! Two under developed Football minds, who’s teammates didn’t want to play for. A OL not wanting to Block for his QB is ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT A QB…
    I’ll be surprised if Fitz isn’t back with the Jets
    Are the Rams really taking the cap hit releasing FOles?
    brock Osweiler is the only QB worth a damn that can realistically be considered an Option… The rest of those names do nothing but extend our time playing musical chairs with QBs. Change for the sake of Change… Not actual OPTIONS that Solve our QB problems… Unfortunateky the Peyton Manning coverup at Tennessee makes it less likely that Broncos allow Osweiler to get away
    Geno Smith? A QB dumb enough to owe money to a 260lb DE is only an Option for wasting more time without a QB

  26. 26 Charlie Kelly said at 6:19 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    if an OL doesnt want to block for QB, says way more about that OL. thats just unacceptable

  27. 27 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:26 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Let’s see 52 players on one side of the room…. One player and Dan Synder On the other side of the room… gee I wonder which side I should believe? Lol

  28. 28 Charlie Kelly said at 6:27 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    ok… “if an OL doesnt want to block for QB, says way more about that OL. thats just unacceptable”

  29. 29 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:17 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Best case scenario. extend SAM, AND Re-Sigń Thad Lewis(Id like to see what Doug can do with him, and check him out in the preseason before letting THAD Lewis get away… CUT Sanchez… Look for a young QB in the next two drafts…
    As long as our best option is still a possibility im not interested in pretending we have all these “options” as alternatives to solving this problem of changing QBs every year

  30. 30 Charlie Kelly said at 6:22 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    forget about thad lewis lol

  31. 31 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:46 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Better than the drastically over rated trash that interests you

  32. 32 Charlie Kelly said at 6:49 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    not even a lil bit.

  33. 33 Charlie Kelly said at 6:18 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    id be ok with trying chase, kap rg3 or foles. but still would NEED to draft QB.

  34. 34 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:18 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Chase should ONLY be a replacement for Sanchez, not an option to replace SAM…

  35. 35 Charlie Kelly said at 6:21 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    sanchez better be gone no matter what, but id give chase a chance to be bridge starter to a rookie. esp if doug thinks highly of him.

  36. 36 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:55 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Lol If he thought Highly of Chase, he wouldn’t be a “bridge”..
    Bridge by definition is an inadequate QB you use for a few weeks to not play a rookie too soon, which is what Pederson was to Donovan…

  37. 37 Charlie Kelly said at 7:01 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Lol pederson can think highly of him enough to give him a chance, while I can think of him as bridge QB.

    You dont sign players if you dont think highly of them’

    step it up bruh

  38. 38 RC5000 said at 6:57 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    No you don’t want to sign Daniel for 3 years to be a backup so it depends how much he’d be. I don’t want to spend future cap space on Daniel if you’re paying Bradford big $. Sanchez has 2 million dead money so it’s not going to benefit you cap-wise.

    Just draft a QB with or without Bradford.

  39. 39 Charlie Kelly said at 7:07 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    could cut sanchez and gain 3.5 million in cap space

  40. 40 RC5000 said at 7:45 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Yeah that won’t gain space in the future signing Daniel to a 3 year deal (his last contract), Sanchez contract is up. Just draft a QB late or sign QB at vet minimum.

  41. 41 Gian GEAGLE said at 7:26 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    I see more use for him as injury Insuramce to a team trying to win now with SAM.. Think he has more value as a backup on a team trying to win, than as a 5 game bridge QB Til you put the rookie in… sanchez can baby sit a rookie QBs spot for 5 weeks, I see Chase as a Lateral move to Sanchez as a bridge QB… But if we try to win wth SAM, I can see a case for Chase being an upgrade to Sanchez as a backup QB, since I watched the entire Team quit as soon as SAM got hurt and Samchez replaced them, and then I saw the team rebound as soon as SAM came back in and sanchez was kicked to the curb
    I don’t really see the need to be changing QBs if we just want a veteran to play the first half of the season.. sanchez can easily fill that Doug Pederson role, and just let hIs contract expire at the end of the season… I see no reason to make a Lateral move and change veteran QB babysitter.. A Bridge QB is a veteran we know is only temporary becayse he isn’t good enough… sanchez sucks, but he can fill that role just fine.. Changing bridge QB strikes me as change for the sake of change

  42. 42 RC5000 said at 8:01 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    The more I looked into Daniel the less I liked him. I know he knows the offense but I don’t want to commit 3 years to him especially if we sign Bradford. I’m not saying it’s terrible but I’d just rather get Hogan, Brissett, Allen or Adams or even Coker and develop them into your backup in a year and save the 3-5 million cap space. That might get you a veteran OL.

  43. 43 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:08 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Well, even if we go with SAM and a capable veteran backup, we still need to draft a QB in the next two drafts (sooner the better)…. But I agree, I don’t love chase either, I actually hate that his name comes up so often as if he is some option THATS worth a damn… But if they were to add him, I would ite as a backup to SAM…
    I really see no poïnt in swapping Sanchez for Chase if we are talkng about a Bridge QB. Sanchez can play 6 games until the rookie ready, and i doubt Chase would make a difference and win more games…
    No matter what, we need to draft a QB this year or next, what’s debateable is if we are drafting that rookie to be a #2 QB right away, or #3 behind SAM and a backup trying to win now?..
    Either go with SAM, Rookie and a THAD Lewis type as your #3, or SAM, veteran backup insurance, and rookie QB as your #3
    But the chase Love is certainly out of control

  44. 44 TypicalDouche said at 6:23 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    As bridge QBs I would take Daniels, Murray or McCarron. The other options I would stay away from. Osweiler would come be here to be the QB of the now/future and I wouldn’t be against that if Pederson thinks that he could be the guy. To me, even though he is unproven, Osweiler is a better option as compared to Bradford just because everyone has seen who Bradford is at this point of his career and that is an average QB, whereas Osweiler still has room to develop and be successful in the right system. Regardless of what they do it would be nice for the Eagles to get a QB to develop. Oh and they must cut Sanchez immediately.

  45. 45 Fufina said at 6:26 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    No interest in Murray or McCarron.. would take at least our 3rds this year and probably more in 2017 to get the deals done. Trading for rookie QB’s that have shown anything is seriously expensive….

  46. 46 TypicalDouche said at 6:28 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    I wasn’t really delving into how to acquire said QBs, I was just speaking more in generalities in regards to the list Tommy put up. Also I think you are overvaluing those QBs. A 3rd and more picks to get either one of those two career backups is absurd. Both of the teams they play have their franchise QBs in place so why would they ask so much for them being that neither is considered a long term option for either team.

  47. 47 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:54 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Prefer Mettenberger than almost anypne on that list of “options”..

  48. 48 FairOaks said at 10:31 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    McCarron opened some eyes, and he’s a good backup on a cheap deal for two more years. That’s actually a pretty valuable commodity — would take at least a third and possibly a second for the Bengals to give up on that insurance policy for Dalton.

    Murray … yeah, probably not worth nearly as much, but again if you’re not getting much, why get rid of an insurance policy who knows your system?

  49. 49 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:51 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    I would rather see what THAD Lewis can do before we go trading away draft picks for guys Who are as,big a longshot as McCarron and Murray.
    If we have to give up draft picks, Id rather it be for someone like Mettenberger or Glennon, even giving up a pick for them doesmt interest me because I would feel we still have to draft a young QB… Rather spend 20mil on a QB we can win with, than spend 1st round picks on QBs I don’t love.. cap space can always be created, we,don’t get back the 1st round picks we piss away busting on QBs.

  50. 50 Charlie Kelly said at 7:09 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    dude youre thad lewis biggest… and only fan

  51. 51 Gian GEAGLE said at 7:13 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Sorry son, but wanting to see what a QB is, is a long ways away From Being a “Fan”…. Im not sure how I can want, or not want a QB I haven’t seen, I leave that type of blowhard fanboyism up to you..
    I don’t just assume that every other teams trash is better than our own.. If I don’t trust THAD Lewis, McCarron, or AJ Murray, why wouldnt I want the one that doesn’t cost me a draft pick to find out?
    As if you have any clue what THAD is or what he isn’t, and whether or not that LONGSHOT names you throw around are significantly better than THAD or not….
    Personally. Id like to actually See a kid before I know if I want Him or not… And I doubt many teams have #3’Qbs who are levels above,THAD Lewis.. But feel free to continue to talk out your ass. Im used to it, it’s the Philly media way

  52. 52 Charlie Kelly said at 7:16 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    i now what thad is.. he is dookie. hes lucky to be a 3rd string QB. lmfao get a clue

  53. 53 Gian GEAGLE said at 7:20 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    You bore me, And add no substance to the equation, back to being invisible you go

  54. 54 Charlie Kelly said at 7:26 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    you called out for your terrible opinions, deal with it.

  55. 55 Buge Halls said at 7:27 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Typing huge diatribes like you really doesn’t “add substance to the equation” either. In fact they clutter up the page and just make us all scroll farther past them

  56. 56 ChoTime said at 8:58 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I’m getting finger tendonitis as we speak.

  57. 57 Fufina said at 7:04 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Ok lets talk about 2017 for a second since i think we need to take it into context for moves in 2016.

    Currently we have $117 mil in cap committed in 2017 in 37 players. add in 2 sets of draft picks that will add ~$15mil more. That gives us cap space of about $38mil in 2017 (assuming a $170 cap). However we have free agents in Jenkins, Cox and Logan, as well a range of RFA’s like Parkey that we will probably want to retain at a cost of about ~$5mil for 3-4 of them.

    There are some probable cuts Murray for $4mil, and Peters for $9.2mil, but outside that there are not obvious contracts you would want to get rid of (think Maxwell will prove to be worth more than the 4.6mil cap saving cutting him would save), Barwin is a possible cap saving contract but i think he will look like value on that contract considering his production.

    So assuming just those 2 cuts, we get to a cap figure of roughly $45mil, which needs to include Jenkins, Cox, and possible Logan extensions, anything we do with Thurmond/Carroll this year to retain 1 or both of them, any free agency spending in the next 2 years, and obviously spending on a QB, and have money for a Matthews extension as well (smallish cap hit in 2017 but would need some space)

    Which is where the Bradford question comes into focus, Bradford is probably going to get 2 years $40mil guaranteed if he signs a multi year deal, with other stuff on the back end, will probably work out as something like a $12mil cap hit in 2016, $22mil cap hit in 2017 (6 further mil in prorated money over the 3 future years of contract).

    Considering you need to plan to be able to tag cox at ~$15mil as a worse case, things will be getting tight cap wise, and you will need to make some tough choices with extensions in 2016/2017 or basically sit out FA entirely to make it work.

    This is not to say we cannot keep Bradford, but doing so means we are going to have to make a range of choices that is going to constrict our roster options moving forward.

  58. 58 RC5000 said at 7:11 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    117 +15 =132…155-132 is 23 million not 38 million. I think you forgot to add the 15 million?

  59. 59 Fufina said at 7:13 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Talking 2017, and a 170mil cap = 38mil spare 😉

  60. 60 RC5000 said at 7:15 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    I JUST NOTICED 2017 lol, I was wondering. I just have this year on the brain. My eyes went right to the cap numbers.

  61. 61 Fufina said at 5:46 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    My thought is that it just adds an extra $64mil to an already rich pool of free agent money. Teams that were mulling bring back a guy due to cap restrictions are going to be more willing to retain them and that means an even smaller free agent pool. Smaller supply and even more money = crazy inflation.

    My perspective would be extend everyone you can, as soon as you can and basically sit out FA the next 2 years only shopping very selectively on 1-2 mid level guys. Some horrible contracts are going to handed out, and when the cap stops rising at $15mil a year in 2018, some teams are going to be in a mess, which hopefully matches up with our window when we want to be competitive with a new QB.

  62. 62 Media Mike said at 5:53 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    “My perspective would be extend everyone you can, as soon as you can and basically sit out FA the next 2 years only shopping very selectively on 1-2 mid level guys.”

    Fufina for the win!

    Extending all of your guys NOW under 2014 and older contracts as the model will allow you to really maximize the $155 in your favor.

  63. 63 Gian GEAGLE said at 7:09 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    a “Bridge” QB only works if you can get a franchise QB you trust in the draft… Not sure how I can go with a Bridge QB when looking at this crop of QBs, and the fact that we don’t pick Til 13 and DONT have a 2nd round picks..
    If a QB you like DOESNT last Til #13, or the kid you draft turns out to be a bust, Your “Bridge” QB becomes your starting QB,.. How many years go by before we hit on a kid that we can turn the franchise over to via the draft? 1 year of Chase Daniels could EASILY turn into 3 years before we actually hit on a franchise QB via the draft.. Im not willing to risk pissing away the next 3 years of my fandom, when we already invested FOles and 2nd round pick in a QB I think we can win with now. If our HEADCoach believes he can really compete with SAM, then there shouldnt be ANYTHNG else to talk about..
    Plenty of Franchises Build a STACKED roster while playing Big Money for a QB. I trust that our Cap wizard can pay a QB and not have it cripple our ability to build a team like many franchises with GMs who aren’t as Cap Savy as Roseman are able to do…
    Going with a BRIDGE QB is much easier to do when you have the #2 pick in the draft and see a QB you really believe in and can reasonably expect to be on the board when you pick at #2

  64. 64 Charlie Kelly said at 7:10 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    you do now you are making zero sense, right? your stuck on this label of “bridge QB.” Meanwhile you want to start thad lewis or sanchez. lmfao just stop bro

  65. 65 Nick C said at 7:26 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    He never said that. He said he thinks they are on the same level as the RG3 and Kap. Is he slightly exaggerating? yeah… but for what you are getting versus the salaries that RG3 and Kap will look for, I would almost prefer Sanchez as well. And I hate Sanchez… He clearly said he wants Sam. You are the one that wants a “bridge” QB who is garbage. Why can’t we have a bridge QB who has actual potential like Sam? I’m all for tagging Sam and drafting a QB

  66. 66 Charlie Kelly said at 7:33 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    sanchez and thad are not on the same level as kap and rg3.

    omg u prefer sanchez? barf.

    ill take sam tho, got no issue with that. if anyone wants sanchez or thad lewis they are out of their minds. period.

  67. 67 botto said at 8:19 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Sancho is better then Reginald the third. well maybe.

  68. 68 Nick C said at 8:23 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Your reading skills are vastly overrated.

  69. 69 the DONALD said at 9:48 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    haha i can imagine charlie saying this rant.. nice work

  70. 70 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:00 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Your clearly wasting your time man…

  71. 71 botto said at 8:18 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    shoulda got BRIDGEwater

  72. 72 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:53 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    i will hate Pederson forever if he dares bring Chase,Daniels to this city because he liked how he looked in practice…
    NFL season with Chase as our QB would be MISERABLY especially in this city..

  73. 73 eagleyankfan said at 7:38 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Agreed. Don’t settle and get a below avg. bridge with a rookie that you hope will work out.
    I think some on that list are more impressive than the rookie class….

  74. 74 Sean Stott said at 7:40 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Kaepernick was never anything more than a running back who occasionally threw. His throwing motion is severely limiting, and it affects his windup time (makes it very easy to read him) as well as his accuracy (he doesn’t have any accuracy or touch). He is awful. Would comfortably rather have Gabbert or RG3.

  75. 75 Fufina said at 7:51 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Not that i want him, but think that is ridiculous hot take. He was a major part of the 49ers going to the SB, and in the right offense he can make big plays, protect the ball and win games.

    Unfortunately loosing Greg Roman, the general idiocy that organisation has gone through wasting one of the best rosters in the NFL, and being put in a situation where the scheme did not play to his strengths made him ineffective.

    However if you tailor your offense to him he can win games, especially if you give him a decent defense and he only needs to make 2-3 plays a game.

  76. 76 Sean Stott said at 8:00 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    There’s no point in having in having a QB if he can’t make any accurate passes, which gets compounded when his baseball pitcher windup requires him to take 1.5 seconds to complete a throw. He’s hot garbage man.

  77. 77 Media Mike said at 5:07 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Kaep = massive piece of garbage.

  78. 78 Gian GEAGLE said at 7:59 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    RG3 is just as bad

  79. 79 bill said at 8:44 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    The year before Kaep’s SB run, Alex Smith was a ST boneheaded play away from taking that exact same team to the SB. Kaep was always highly overrated. He can run fast, and throw deep, but I struggle to think of a QB who sucked more at the fundamental mental skills of the position. Roman knew this, and kept it one read and run for most plays.

  80. 80 Fufina said at 8:49 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    Look i don’t like him, all i am saying is that in the right offence that is tailored to his specific skills he can be effective. He cannot run a conventional NFL offense for all the reasons people said, however he is not ‘awful’ because unlike some truly bad QB’s if you use him in the right way you can win a fair few games.

  81. 81 Dave said at 8:49 PM on February 15th, 2016:

    He has the all tools and the athletic ability to be something special. Kaep’s biggest flaw lies between his ears. I think we all learned from Vick, that’s not something that can be fixed.

  82. 82 Media Mike said at 4:53 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Please keep Kaepertrash and RGMe&myBrand off of all future QB possibility lists.

    Thank you.

  83. 83 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:48 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Seriously, those two bird brains should be listed in the Manziel category

  84. 84 bdbd20 said at 7:54 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Murray is an interesting name. Big time player in SEC. I was surprised where he went in the draft. I guess his physical traits weren’t too good.

    At this point, I’m not sure trading draft picks is a good move.

    RG3 is really intriguing. Reid loved him coming out of college. He has all the talent in the world.

  85. 85 eagleyankfan said at 8:10 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I don’t see any shape or form where RG3 is intriguing. He’s not the same person that came out of college.

  86. 86 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:15 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Is rookie year was soooooo overrated… Who the hell didn’t khow that he wouldn’t be able to sustain that level of success only looking at his first read? It’s why I was NEVER impressed by what he showed as a rookie. I knew he couldn’t sustain that success playing the game like that, and to succeed, his QB brain needed to develope, he needed to Learm to read defenses, and get thru all his reads, manipulate defenders with his eyes,… He was so under developed in those areas and doesn’t seem like he has improved at all in this area,.
    QB brain is what’s important, and RG3’s was very underdeveloped… The curse of MIKE Vick, all the athletocism and talent but guys thnk they don’t have to learn the mental side of being a pro QB..
    Im baffled as to how anypne could want RG3 or KAp in philly… Absurdity at its finest

  87. 87 EaglesGameBalls said at 9:10 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    does this guy EVER stop typing? get a life dude

  88. 88 the DONALD said at 9:42 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    wait, aren’t you the same person?

  89. 89 EaglesGameBalls said at 10:02 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    notice nobody thumbs you up

  90. 90 the DONALD said at 10:58 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    my feelings are hurt.. ill go cry in the corner bc all my hopes and dreams are crushed.. do you ever get a vote that isnt a down…? or yourself?

  91. 91 EaglesGameBalls said at 11:12 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Nobody thinks your funny. Enjoy your day

  92. 92 the DONALD said at 12:24 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    you are a laugh a minute, well post.

  93. 93 A_T_G said at 10:29 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Yet, here you are, spending yours reading them and offering advice.

  94. 94 EaglesGameBalls said at 10:35 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I don’t read them. They are like freaking novels.

  95. 95 bdbd20 said at 9:11 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    The point was that Reid loved him.

    He does have talent, maybe not with his legs anymore, and AR obviously saw something in him. Maybe he was wrong, but Pederson was with AR in those meetings.

  96. 96 Gian GEAGLE said at 1:55 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Lucky us, Andy Reid coaches KAnsas City

  97. 97 A_T_G said at 10:31 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    As an added plus, if we bring in him and the RB on the outs with Oakland we could have an all-Murray backfield. The comedy of Phil Sims trying to announce the action would be worth the salaries.

  98. 98 eagleyankfan said at 8:08 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    “Doesn’t seem like the kind of guy Pederson would want for his offense” — why? Statements like that kill me without a reason. Why bother typing it?
    Bengals won’t give up AJ. And why would they? He’s more on a wish list.
    Brock. FA but will cost a lot of money. If that’s money Denver is willing to pay — why wouldn’t the Eagles be willing?
    Murray. Since people like to bring up what happened in the past as a way to predict what Pederson should do – why wouldn’t Pederson trade for KC’s back up? It’s what AR did when he went to KC – trade for a QB. We must do everything AR did. Otherwise how can the Eagles be successful?
    Hoping one year we can stop bringing AR into every piece. He’s gone. Done. Anything he did back has no impact on what happens today. Yesterdays success doesn’t(always) equal tomorrows success.
    Not sure I can look at that list, or the rookie class, and feel better about Bradford not being here.

  99. 99 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:10 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Preach it!!!! “Can Geezus Feel the pain in my heart?”-Borat

  100. 100 A_T_G said at 10:26 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    For Brock, I imagine it would take significantly more money to entice a guy away from the status quo, Super Bowl winning team trying to hand him the keys.

  101. 101 eagleyankfan said at 12:15 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I agree — but money has nothing to do with statement that Os is the ‘kind of guy Pederson doesn’t seem to like for his offense’….

  102. 102 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:23 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Id love to slap Bradford with the Tag today, and put his agent in Check… Let’s see if he is willing to bet his future that he can avoid injury for another year. Put an end to his March bidding war Dreams and limit his options to gambling on his health another year, or finding a fair deal, that pays him well To remain in Philly

  103. 103 Ryan Rambo said at 9:00 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Especially knowing we traded away a 2nd rounder for him.

  104. 104 Dave said at 9:01 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I think at a minimum Sam should be franchised for leverage, either against Sam’s agent, or for the draft. If Sam walks in free agency, we go into the draft with the whole NFL knowing we are looking at QB with pick 13. Without a 2nd round pick, it’s doubtful we could move up without mortgaging picks next year. In that manner, Sam’s 1 year rental would have cost us a 2 this year, and possibly a 1 or 2 next year.

    If Sam is franchised and does not sign a long-term deal, we now have the option to draft a guy if he is available at 13.

    I just know I don’t want to go into the draft with Chase Daniel, Nick Foles, Mark Sanchez, or some other seat warmer as the only QB on the roster. If that happens, I have many horrible scenarios in my mind where all 3 QBs are drafted before us, or that the Rams leap-frog us with our own 2nd round pick to take the last of the big 3 QBs. Without a 2nd round pick, history shows that the odds are slim that we could get anything better than an average starter in the 3rd round or later.

    Chip really left us in a shitty position. Growth mindset my ass!

  105. 105 Gian GEAGLE said at 2:03 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Yes, for me franchising him would only be useful as precursor to get an eventual extension done which is what I want to happen at some point anyway.. Hopefully we can achieve this without tagging him, but I hope we would tag him before we just let him walk … but if we were to use the franchise Tag, it would never happen now, it would happen at the last minute before free agency starts… No reason to tie up 20mil, weeks earlier than we need to

  106. 106 Dave said at 4:14 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I honestly think the only way an extension gets done with Sam is if he is allowed to walk in free agency to see if he can get a better deal than Howie offered. If no team will meet his financial demands, I could see him back. If he plays under the franchise deal, I don’t see his contract demands being lowered next off season, regardless of how he plays in 2016. Plus I’m pretty sure he knows that if he plays under the 1 year franchise tender, the Eagles will draft a QB to replace him so they don’t have to deal with his agent again next off season.

    With $70M in the bank already, it seems apparent that money is the most important factor for Sam. Unlike guys like Brandon Graham, Vinny Curry, Zach Ertz, and Lane Johnson, who all took some sort of pay cut compared to what they would have gotten on the free agent market, Sam doesn’t seem to mind moving on to another team.

  107. 107 Fufina said at 9:05 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Cant see anything happening pre combine even if they plan to tag him, Go out and get a feel for the market, if the 49ers, Bronco’s and Texans are not interested in him he could well sign a 1 year 10mil type deal to retest the market in 2017.

    If there is a lot of interest then you might tag him and see where discussions go, and either extend him or trade him if the $$ are not going to work out.

    Thats assuming the team wants to keep him.

  108. 108 Gian GEAGLE said at 1:53 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    They would NEVER tag him TODAY, instantly tying up 20mil in cap… If they were to Tag him, it would happen at the last mInute before free agency starts, by then Roseman would have probably freed up more cap space. No reason to tie up 20mil right now by Tagging him… I was just speaking from the standpoint of my emotional amusement, no shot the tag would ever happen today

  109. 109 EaglesGameBalls said at 9:09 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    He isn’t going to play for the franchise tag dude. He is the QB and if you make him unhappy he will just throw interceptions. You are so dumb.

  110. 110 Fufina said at 9:13 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Think he will happily play with the $20mil tag, and then be available in 2017 in an even bigger market. Lets be real he has not played great, but lets say he puts up 4k yards and 30td/10ints and the Eagles go 11-5?

    He is getting the biggest contract in NFL history in 2017 under that scenario, so he will jump at the chance to play with the tag. He has plenty in the bank already so can take a risk in 2016 and he is not going to get more than $20mil a year as a long term contract this year.

  111. 111 EaglesGameBalls said at 9:15 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    No he won’t. Why would he risk injury. He WILL NOT play for the franchise tag. I gaurateee you that. Of ANY player in the history of the NFL, Sam Bradford is the one that makes the LEAST amount of sense to play under a franchise tag. Be real man. If you don’t know what you are talking about then stop talking!!!!

  112. 112 Fufina said at 9:21 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    He has like 70mil in the bank, why would only sign a 5 year deal which is effectively a 2 year deal making him 36mil, at the cost possibly gaining a LOT more.

    He is offsetting 16-20mil guaranteed, for the opportunity to earn 40-50mil more over the same time period. He is not going to throw his toys out of the pram in that situation.

  113. 113 A_T_G said at 10:14 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    How is he less likely to get injured throwing intentional interceptions? That doesn’t even make sense. He would have twice as many chances to get leveled.

    You talk about being real, but there has not been one solitary example of a player purposely losing games because of getting franchise tagged.

    Maybe, big maybe, he decides he can make more money if he refuses the 20 million gaurenteed salary this year and sits out. If he is as bad as you say, though, who is going to sign him to a contract next year that gives him over 20 million more in a year less than whatever the Eagles offer him this year?

  114. 114 EaglesGameBalls said at 10:34 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    THey wouldn’t play him and he wouldn’t get injured.

  115. 115 BlindChow said at 11:03 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    The Eagles’ offense will have fewer snaps if he throws the ball to the other team on every 1st & 10. Fewer snaps = less likely to get injured. That’s just science.

  116. 116 A_T_G said at 11:54 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    In that scenario, I think he would be more likely to get injured on his own sideline. Or locker room. Or parking lot.

    But regardless, there is zero chance of him doing that.

  117. 117 laeagle said at 4:05 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Good points, but don’t know why you bother.

  118. 118 FairOaks said at 2:36 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    He could — he has made a boatload of $$$ already, so he should be plenty secure, and the tag would represent quite a bit more than he could have earned this season. He chose to bet on himself this past year; if he thinks he could get significantly better offers next year then he might bet on himself again.

    If he really wants to play somewhere else, and he’s tagged, then he also might just take the tag and get out for sure after the season. But I’m sure he would prefer he is not tagged, so a lot of actions / demands right now might be geared towards trying to prevent himself from being tagged.

  119. 119 Ryan Rambo said at 9:50 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Who would want a pouting QB who throws intentional interceptions to prove his displeasure? Really?

  120. 120 botto said at 1:41 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    so he was just unhappy in the first half of the year? well that good

  121. 121 Mac said at 9:33 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I’m down with using the franchise tag on Bradford and keeping it in Howie’s room so he can pull it away from Bradford and Condon when they show up to sign it and yelling, “Sike!”

  122. 122 Fufina said at 9:49 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I think Howie should place it and take it off every day until the end of the Tag window just to fuck with the Eagles Beat writers. Do it at totally random times, at 2am, 5pm, Sunday or Friday, maybe go 2-3 days without doing it to build suspense again, and watch as they beat themselves into a frenzy trying to create a narrative when in fact they are being trolled.

    Make it so Howie, make it so!

  123. 123 EaglesGameBalls said at 9:08 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I like Geno Smith. He is in desperate need of coaching from someone like Doug Pederson.

  124. 124 Mac said at 9:31 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Unless Pederson is also a Psy.D, I have no interest.

  125. 125 the DONALD said at 9:49 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    thought you were all about the Sanchize?

  126. 126 P_P_K said at 11:09 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I liked Geno coming out of college.

  127. 127 the DONALD said at 12:25 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    thought you were all about the Sanchize? wasnt that a “lock”

  128. 128 Bleeding Green Nation :: Eagles News: Nolan Carroll wants to stay in Philadelphia - Rainy Monster said at 9:41 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    […] Developing QBs – Iggles BlitzRGIII – The great mystery man. Did amazing things as a rookie. Since then, his career has been nothing but injuries and controversy. I think putting him in a new environment could make a world of difference. That said, there are no guarantees he’ll ever get back to what he was. […]

  129. 129 scratcherk said at 10:09 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Dont understand the strategy behind not franchising Bradford but OK fine. But why wouldnt you at least transition tag him? No lose situation, right?

  130. 130 Fufina said at 10:26 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    well 3 situations really,

    1) if you don’t want to keep him you could end up paying him $17mil
    2) you want to keep him and he walks with an offer you cannot match
    3) you want to keep him but no one else did and you could have signed him for a lot less on a short term contract.

  131. 131 Gian GEAGLE said at 2:00 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Transition Tag only benefits us if Roseman believes that what he is offering I Bradford is closer to what his value would be on the open market… if Bradfords agent is asking for 25mil, and we transition tag him and find out his agent was right and teams offer him 25mil, than we will have screwed ourselves by transition tagging him..
    Basically to use the Tag the GM is betting that the open market value would prove that his agent is asking too much..

  132. 132 scratcherk said at 10:10 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Another question — would signing Bradford count as an FA signing and against us for compensation picks or would it be signing one of our own?

  133. 133 sonofdman said at 10:23 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I don’t think resigning Bradford counts against us for compensatory picks.

  134. 134 EaglesGameBalls said at 10:33 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    That’s a good point. If Bradford walks then I think we would get a fourth round compensatory pick.

  135. 135 A_T_G said at 10:37 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Haven’t you been paying attention? That has been discussed, everywhere, ad nauseum. It would only happen if we let him walk AND sit out free agency. A fourth rounder 14 months from now is not incentive enough to pass on filling any of the holes we have this year. Views on Bradford doesn’t even factor in to the equation and it is moot.

  136. 136 EaglesGameBalls said at 10:38 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Oh you are wrong. We would get a fourth rounder. Have a good day.

  137. 137 A_T_G said at 12:22 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I would love to be wrong. Personally, I am not Bradford or bust, and I am always open to more picks. Tell us more.

    Clearly, you are predicting we do not resign Bradford. He must then sign a big deal, correct? Are you also predicting we sit out free agency? Or make minor moves and Bradford’s deal overpowers them in the formula? Or that reports about the formula are wrong?

  138. 138 EaglesGameBalls said at 12:39 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    The formula is proprietary. Nobody knows what it is.

  139. 139 sonofdman said at 1:13 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    While the exact formula is not known, the pattern has been studied over a number of years and it is relatively predictable at this point if you take the time to look over the whole league. Jimmy Kempski did an article going into detail about it a couple weeks ago.

  140. 140 EaglesGameBalls said at 2:04 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    that’s all hearsay. Nobody knows what the true formula is.

  141. 141 RichEagle said at 2:07 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Jimmy has a few articles on this. This is the latest…..

  142. 142 A_T_G said at 3:18 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Yet you know it results in a 4th rounder? Despite all the regression-typed studies that predict otherwise. Please, tell us more.

  143. 143 scratcherk said at 10:37 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    maybe even a third because he’ll sign for big money somewhere and those picks are based on how big of a contract they signed. (assuming we dont sign anyone good to counteract it)

  144. 144 FairOaks said at 1:44 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    It would just be retaining one of our own — that is kind of the point of the rule. If we lose him, we likely get a third-round compensation pick in return, provided we sign fewer qualifying FAs than we lose (which might then enter in the calculation of how many FAs we want to sign).

    If we tag him and later drop the tag, we don’t get any compensation — he would no longer be a qualifying FA in that case.

    Other than Bradford, we could lose Thurmond, Thornton, Carroll, Biggers, and Thad Lewis, who all could potentially count as qualifying. If any of those sign for the veteran minimum, or are released before a certain point (seems like <= 10 games) during the 2016 season (which may only apply to 1-year contracts), they would not qualify — so it would take greater than minimum contract. For example, Cary Williams signed a one-year deal for much more than the minimum — but by dropping him ten games into the season, I believe he no longer counts as a qualifying FA signing by Seattle, so they are in line for an additional comp pick this year. The NFL does not make the rules of who exactly qualifies as a "compensatory free agent" public, so it has been guessed at based on the results.

    If we lose say four qualifying free agents, and only sign two, then we would get two comp picks next year, with the rounds being determined by the qualify of player. I'd have to imagine Bradford would be way up there, and should get the highest possible pick, a third rounder. Depending on the contract it could be a fourth I guess.

  145. 145 justanotherdummy said at 10:40 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    As it concerns Foles, Jeff Fisher is a qb killer. He got Steve McNair almost beaten to death. Couldn’t get along with Vince Young, who was not a rocket scientist, but should have yielded more than what he did. Didn’t accomplish anything with Bradford, who should have had a better chance to succeed. Hires and fires OC’s, can’t keep the qb upright, makes bad O Line selections, plays a stupid scheme. I don’t think Nicky Football is awesome, but Jeff Fisher could make any OC or qb look like a bag full or garbage.

  146. 146 Dave said at 11:54 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Jeff Fisher is a defensive coach. His offensive coordinators are the ones who have been substandard.

    Jerry Rhome (Titans)
    Les Steckel (Titans)
    Norm Chow (Titans)
    Mike Heimerdinger (Titans)
    Brian Schottenheimer (Rams)
    Frank Cignetti (Rams)

  147. 147 FairOaks said at 1:25 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Much like an offensive head coach who does not make good DC hires. But Fisher may have a preferred offense which is much too simple — i.e. can’t attract a good OC. Shouldn’t be as dramatic as Kelly’s issues in that area, but it could still be a problem. It sure seems like Foles regressed during the season last year — would not be surprised if they had bad coaching (which might also have resulted in Bradford’s dump-off tendencies, which would take longer than a season to fix).

  148. 148 Dave said at 4:03 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Nick’s regression started here and continued in St. Louis.

    Fisher fired his OC at the end of the season. He was only there for the 2015 season.

    I’m shocked Fisher still has a job. He’ll be in the broadcast booth in 2017.

  149. 149 A_T_G said at 10:40 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Food for thought:

  150. 150 EaglesGameBalls said at 10:41 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    why would it be different?

  151. 151 quest4fire said at 10:46 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Maclin is a nice player but he is not worth franchise tag money. KC overpaid.

  152. 152 EaglesGameBalls said at 10:49 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    He is the tenth highest paid wide receiver. That’s not overpaying.

  153. 153 botto said at 12:24 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    it is if he is the 11th best

  154. 154 EaglesGameBalls said at 12:38 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    not really.

  155. 155 botto said at 1:39 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    11 is less then 10 in this equation

  156. 156 ChoTime said at 4:08 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    He is overpaid if he is not worth the production to _this team_. His cost relative to the rest of the league is irrelevant.

  157. 157 quest4fire said at 4:30 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    2014 with Eagles–85 rec/1318yds/10TDs. 2015 with Chiefs–87rec/1088/8TDs. Yeah they overpaid

  158. 158 EaglesGameBalls said at 10:47 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Was Maclin going to switch to offensive line or tell Chip Kelly he needs more than four plays? WHat a dumb tweet.

  159. 159 P_P_K said at 11:08 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    I disagree because I like the tweet, it’s interesting food for thought at this point in a long off-season. I agree because you’re right about Maclin probably not getting a chance to fulfill his talent in Chip’s boneheaded offense.

  160. 160 botto said at 12:23 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    was his career year not fulfillment enough ?

  161. 161 P_P_K said at 8:20 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    No. I thought of his stellar year but concluded it was an anomaly like Foles career year. One man’s opinion.

  162. 162 TypicalDouche said at 1:03 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Correct me if I am wrong but didn’t Jackson and Maclin both have career seasons under Kelly?

  163. 163 P_P_K said at 8:34 AM on February 17th, 2016:

    You’re right and you got me thinking about my position. Maclin, Jackson and McCoy all had great years under Chip. Foles, too. This past year, the O was mundane, predictable and slower. Was it the loss of these three weapons (and the resulting poorer play by their subs), that opposing DCs had figured out the attack, and/or was Chip as boneheaded as I’ve been thinking? I guess I’m not so sure.

  164. 164 FairOaks said at 1:21 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    It’s interesting because it would have meant that 1) Bradford would have had a reliable #1 receiver from the get-go, 2) We pick someone else in the first round who might have contributed more than Agholor did, and 3) we would not have had the money to sign Murray so Kelly wouldn’t have tried forcing that square peg all year long.

    Kelly probably does still screw up the OL but we also wouldn’t have the runner least equipped to handle that.

  165. 165 botto said at 1:38 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    12th best oline in the nfl last year

  166. 166 EaglesGameBalls said at 2:04 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    The Eagles had 4 plays man! 4 plays!!!!

  167. 167 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:42 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Here’s a mindfuck revisionist history for you:
    instead of drafting my boy Maaaaarcus Daaarling, they could have drafted Bradley Robey, keeping Maclin means we could have drafted Byron Jones instead of Agholar, and our secondary TODAY could be ROWE/Robey as our corners on cheap rookie deals, Byron Jones at safety on a cheap rookie deal next to Jenkins, and we wouldn’t have had to pay Maxwell or Murray…

  168. 168 Gian GEAGLE said at 11:10 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Why? Could have just coughed up the extra mil of two and signed him, had we had the forsight to realize it wasn’t overpaying Maclin when DEZ, Demaryious and Julio signed their new deal

  169. 169 FairOaks said at 1:18 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    He probably doesn’t even get official offers from other teams if we did that. Our long-term offer might have been close enough in that case.

  170. 170 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:40 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    True that….

  171. 171 Gian GEAGLE said at 11:07 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    LOL @ KAPERNICK dating Aldon Smiths,ex,girlfriend #Culture

  172. 172 Fufina said at 11:09 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Ha Chip and Kaep is a match made in hell… i cannot see how they do not go for an alternative QB and cut his ass.

  173. 173 Gian GEAGLE said at 11:11 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    Aldon smith destroyed Kapernicks Jaguar lol… They had such a fight at the Niners facility that the coaches sent the entire team home for the day

  174. 174 Gian GEAGLE said at 11:12 AM on February 16th, 2016:

    If Kap remains in San Fran, it would clearly mean that chip has no power

  175. 175 Gary Barnes said at 12:45 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    A lot of options, Tommy? Seriously? Sorry, but all of those options are either very flawed or mediocre or raw IMO.

    Let’s be real. Bradford is the only viable option if the Eagles want to win anything of note this season. The problem is he is also flawed; just less so than the other options.

    The odds are also heavily stacked against a draft pick QB coming in and performing well in their rookie campaign.

    The Eagles have screwed themselves with a big assist by Chip. They either need to bite the bullet, keep Bradford and try to win now while retooling on the fly or let Bradford go and admit 2016 will have a full-on build focus with winning being less important.

    They’ll never do the latter and would be creamed by the media/fans anyway if they tried. So we know which way they are going and the extensions for Ertz, Celek, Curry and glacial movement on any cuts besides no-brainer Cooper reinforce that reality.

    The repeatedly floated “news” that the Eagles will not franchise tag Bradford translates to “Lower your demands, Sam or we’ll let you go. If you want to play in Houston or Cleveland, enjoy yourself”. The Eagles are playing hard ball which will likely go until the last minute when they admit finally Bradford is their only viable option.

  176. 176 Mitchell said at 2:02 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Thats why they are options….

  177. 177 Gian GEAGLE said at 2:05 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    This article makes me feel worse about our “options” or lack there of..
    Pretty depressing article, opposite of the premise that we actually have a bunch of options….. Those are cleveland Brown level “options” at best…

  178. 178 Ben said at 1:06 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    After reading this article it seems abundantly clear that we have no choice but to tag or resign Bradford as the other choices are all lesser players with little upside.
    If the Eagles want to win now then Bradford clearly gives them the best chance.
    I would think Pederson, Lurie and Howie can all agree that keeping Bradford is best for the Eagles considering the other options.

  179. 179 EaglesGameBalls said at 2:05 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    How are they going to win now with no wide receivers, no offensive line, and no RBs?

  180. 180 botto said at 2:10 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Bradford to bradford all day

  181. 181 Julescat said at 2:19 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    no RBs?


  182. 182 EaglesGameBalls said at 2:26 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    what RB is good?

  183. 183 Julescat said at 2:33 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Sproles, Matthews, Murray

  184. 184 EaglesGameBalls said at 2:36 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Murray is good? Sproles isn’t even going to be on the team. Matthews rhad 539 yards last year. So yeah the RBs suck.

  185. 185 the DONALD said at 2:36 PM on February 16th, 2016:


  186. 186 anon said at 2:38 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    but highest ypc in the league

  187. 187 EaglesGameBalls said at 2:39 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    He’s had 2 1000 yard seasons in his 6 year career. He isn’t good.

  188. 188 anon said at 2:40 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    he was the vinny curry of rbs.

  189. 189 EaglesGameBalls said at 2:41 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    that would be true if Vinny Curry got hurt all the time.

  190. 190 EaglesGameBalls said at 2:39 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Ryan Matthews had 1 100 yard game last year. He is good????

  191. 191 Julescat said at 3:26 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    but you stated the line was bad. the RBs could be more successful with a better line and a better offensive scheme.

  192. 192 EaglesGameBalls said at 4:13 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    you said the RBs were good. They aren’t

  193. 193 the DONALD said at 2:35 PM on February 16th, 2016:


  194. 194 the DONALD said at 2:35 PM on February 16th, 2016:


  195. 195 Media Mike said at 4:51 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Damn, I’m jealous I didn’t think of this.

  196. 196 Media Mike said at 4:50 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I though you killed yourself.

  197. 197 Ben said at 10:01 PM on February 25th, 2016:

    You get those in FA and the draft AND some O line help and we good.

  198. 198 Ben said at 11:17 PM on February 27th, 2016:

    Okay here’s a suggestion,
    You trade down from 13 to 19 and get our second round draft pick back.
    Grab a top flight OT – Taylor Decker
    Then in round two you bag a top flight WR, Michael Thomas should still be there.
    In round three maybe an OG, Whitehair or Alexander, or even Turner.
    I doubt we lack talent at RB, as it was more of an offensive line issue that led to a poor ground game.
    There’s the rest of the draft and also Free Agency.
    Look no further than the Carolina Panthers to see how a team can get to the big show without amazing players.

  199. 199 Fufina said at 2:04 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Little early for Redskins to play the "we've broken off talks" card, isn't it?— Ross Tucker (@RossTuckerNFL) February 16, 2016

  200. 200 Fufina said at 2:04 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Skins already starting to skinsy things.

  201. 201 Gian GEAGLE said at 2:06 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Assume,he gets tagged at some point

  202. 202 Julescat said at 2:18 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    is Cousins really that valuable? wouldn’t the skins be better if Bradford was their QB?

  203. 203 botto said at 2:34 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    that’s a good one

  204. 204 Gian GEAGLE said at 2:54 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Would I tag Cousins? No.. Will the Skins? Of course they will, what choice do they have? They are lucky that Cousins at least emerged from the Rg3 Debacle that they created…. After everything they lost investing in RG3, no way they ever let Cousins get away too. Im sure they hope it doesn’t come down to tagging him, but they will def tag him right before free agency if they haven’t agreed on an Extension..
    How can they let him go and target Bradford or Oswieler if they don’t even know if those Qbs will even make it to the open market?

  205. 205 anon said at 2:57 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    funny that every coach since 2012 wanted cousins to play an snyder ruined 3 years of football pumping rgiii

  206. 206 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:02 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Basically… Both Shannahan and Gruden swore Cousins was a Franchise QB long before he had success this year..
    All we need to know about RG3 is We didn’t hear a single teammate say anything to support him or see any teammate upset that they were benching Rg3 for Cousins..

  207. 207 Media Mike said at 4:48 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Great question.

    I think Cousins wants the Stafford deal, but the Redskins want him on the Kaep / Daulton deal.

  208. 208 A_T_G said at 4:35 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Joe Banner approves.

  209. 209 EaglesGameBalls said at 2:08 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    People, calm down. they are not extending bradford, they are not franchise tagging Bradford. Bradford will not be on this team next year. get over it.

  210. 210 Julescat said at 2:18 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    time will tell

  211. 211 the DONALD said at 2:36 PM on February 16th, 2016:


  212. 212 EaglesGameBalls said at 2:38 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    will this ever get funny?

  213. 213 the DONALD said at 2:58 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    small taste of your annoyance

  214. 214 TypicalDouche said at 3:22 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Tommy should hire you immediately just to troll the troll every time he/she comments on here. It would be funny and entertaining for us readers and that might also drive him away, hopefully.

  215. 215 Nick C said at 3:24 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I’ll pitch in $1 of his salary

  216. 216 Mac said at 3:33 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I’m looking forward to his next screen name. My prediction: Geagle’sBalls.

  217. 217 the DONALD said at 4:12 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    ha. if it changes keep me posted.

  218. 218 RobNE said at 3:46 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I’d be for that. That would be entertaining.

  219. 219 the DONALD said at 4:12 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    thats my goal TD. thats the goal…

  220. 220 Nick C said at 2:34 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    So I’ve been playing around with the calculator at OTC again. Things are so slow. But I am tired of hearing about our troubled cap situation. So I made a few easy moves, and not many tough ones:
    1. Tagged Bradford– If you want to hear my argument for this you can read my previous posts
    2. Cut Sanchez: no need if we have Bradford and draft a QB
    3. Cut Demeco Ryans: great Eagle, but you don’t pay a back up LB who is slowing down that kind of money
    4. Trade Connor Barwin: not worth it to release him but saving 6.1M on a rotational DE and getting a decent asset is worth it.
    5. Extended Fletcher Cox 6 years (decent 12.1M cap hit this year)
    6. Extended Jenkins 3 years (lowered cap hit to 5.9M this year)
    7. Extended Sproles 2 years (lowered cap to 3M this year)
    8. Re-signed Najee Goode because that wasn’t updated yet

    After these moves, I ended up with 17M+ in cap space for 2016, and for the forward thinkers: 36M+ in 2017 before we even get Murray and Maxwell off our books. There are more moves that could be made but these were the easy ones. I didn’t restructure Peters or Kelce, or hope to get lucky trading Demarco Murray. At this point we have plenty of resources to grab a potential Safety and Guard in Free Agency, and go into the draft with zero “holes.” Do we have areas in depth we need to address? Yes, of course. But the draft is for depth.

  221. 221 anon said at 2:37 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    no thurmond, carrol? how much space left?

  222. 222 Nick C said at 2:41 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I could have made more space, but I didn’t feel like giving individuals more moves to argue with. 2016 space was a little over 17M; 2017 space was a healthy 36.5M; I said we had room to address S and G. Thurmond will be expensive but if you wanted to go that route, you can. I’m not sure he is their prototypical S or they probably would have rushed to extend him. I think Carrol is on the outside looking in. You do not pay nickel/dime corner the money he is going to receive. If he gets passed by in the first couple waves of free agency due to his injury, I would be willing to look again at him for a reduced rate.

  223. 223 anon said at 2:55 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    agree, wanted to make sure we had $$ for guards. clearly missed that you said $17m left.

  224. 224 FairOaks said at 2:45 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    2. If you draft a QB who is not really ready to play, then you might well need a backup QB. We might be able to get one for less than the 3.5 million it would save to cut Sanchez, but not much. Not having a game-ready backup behind Bradford is a big risk. If we sign Bradford we are not taking a QB at #13… but if we are forced to pay the tag amount we may not have any choice.
    3. We now have three starting LB positions, where in a 3-4 there are only two ILBs. You normally want 5-6 players there, and while Kiko, Kendricks, and Hicks are the presumed starters all of them have injury concerns. You want Goode to be the primary backup? We kept all four last year and needed all of them — and we have an additional starters role for them this year. Ryan might also be a very good leader to keep.
    4. Trading Barwin would open up a lot of cap. But Schwartz may love him as an attacking DE, and he’s a leader, and you already have us cutting Ryans. I think it’s possible given that we re-signed Curry but given Schwartz’ comments… I’m guessing we do keep him.
    7. People are talking about cutting Sproles more than keeping him. I would keep, but not extend. (BTW, “extend” generally means leaving the current contract in place, then adding more years — that will only increase cap hits since you add the signing bonus. I assume you meant “renegotiate”.)

  225. 225 Nick C said at 2:58 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    7. Sproles was more of a restructure without pissing him (and his wife) off. I think he provides leadership by example, and is an offensive weapon not just a RB. Ideally I would trade Demarco this offseason if someone is willing to take him to get to the cap floor. Oakland, Jacksonville, etc? But that is not a sure thing
    4. I viewed this as a scheme and money fit. I would not cut him. And we can argue that he can rush the passer. But we all know he is not an ideal fit. We have a new coach and new scheme. I would rather get young and fresher for a rotational DE. We just have too much money tied into that position and RB at the moment. On the Schwartz comments: take anything every coach says with a huge grain of salt. He is not stupid. He may want him to play, or he may not mind trading him. He will not tip his hand or lower Barwin’s trade value by letting the whole world know that Barwin isn’t a fit. (That is a Chip Kelly move to lower the value then just cut the player)
    3. I am aware the LB depth sucks. None of them can be counted on to stay healthy. But depth is what the draft is for. I wouldn’t mind a low risk, high reward free agent situation here but that opportunity has to present itself. We kept guys like Celek around for leadership. Demeco is just not worth that money. If we want to extend him again…. I guess it is whatever. Personally, I would have rather cut Celek if it was just a pure numbers thing.
    2. I do not think signing bradford should have an effect on drafting a QB. If one of the top 3 is there and we like him, then get him. QB’s do not just fall into your laps unless you are drafting 1 or 2. And we are not that lucky. This team is talented enough to compete for postseason with Sam Bradford. Am I calling us contenders? No. But even without Sam we are still in QB purgatory. We are winning 6+ games.

  226. 226 Gian GEAGLE said at 2:59 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Id consider moving to SPROLES to WR full time, taking care of one of our two WR openings, and freeing up a RB spot for at rookie to bring some youth to the backfields.
    Move SPROLES to a Wes Welker type role

  227. 227 Nick C said at 3:07 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I dont think calling Sproles a full-time receiver is a good move. I’m all for him being moved around and keeping the defense guessing, but I just haven’t seen much production from him out of the slot. Plus we have essentially three slot receivers as it is. Our WR problem is none of them have proven to the reliable outside receivers. Sproles is great out of the backfield and mismatched against LBers, but I dont think we can play Madden and just shift him around anywhere. This team is already going to be a mess with all the change next season. This was part of the problem this season. Just way too many changes, and no continuity. Keep Sproles in the role he has played his whole career.

    EDIT: We may actually see if anyone is an outside receiver this year without Cooper laying down in the endzone

  228. 228 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:16 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    SPROLES admitted we will have a problem If we bring back all 3 RBs… This would help solve that problem, since we don’t have many other appealing options to solve this problem since Murrays contract is almost impossible to trade, and it’s damn sure impossible to cut him.. Moving SPROLES allows us to keep him and Ryan Mathews without losing one to solve the overcrowded Problem at RB
    I also think Chip seriously lacked creativity with how he used SPROLES in the passing game.. I think he has a ton more to offer a passing attack even at this stage of his career than what we saw under Chip..
    We have 3 WRs, two of whch are unproven… We need like 7 WRs at least for camp, at least 5 for the active Roster. Moving SPROLES to a #4 WR spot, allows us to add a #3 RB (rookie who doesn’t need touches adding to the logjam) and a #5 WR, instead of having 3 unhappy veteran RBs and needing to add TWO WRs…
    Hiff damn sure hasnt shown close to enough for me to think that it would be bad to have SPROLES rotate in… Even if you decide to count SPROLES as a WR, DOESNT mean you still can’t line him up in the backfield at times during passing plays. Im sure Huff, Agholar and Jordan will line up in the back field at times under doug so that Defenses can’t Jam them, no reason SPROLES can’t still come out of the backfield at times.. But it would allow Ryan and Murray to coexist without everyone being pissed at the time share lack of touches
    I don’t think will see SPROLES carry the ball half as much as chip used him as a runner, even if he stays at #3 RB

  229. 229 Nick C said at 3:21 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    You think Sproles will be happy as a #4 WR though? Even if this were to work and you could just thrust Sproles into a new position, it goes back to resource allocation once agan. Paying 4.5M for a #4WR is worse than 5M for Cooper (#2 receiver… ish). I love Sproles and would obviously prefer trading Murray (God willing), But Sproles will be unhappy being moved to #4 WR. There is no way he will be on the field enough with Ertz and Celek also needing playing time. I would rather trade/cut Sproles if this was the case. And I really do not want to do that 🙁

  230. 230 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:33 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    He would probably get more snaps as a #4 WR, than as the #3rd down RB… And if you want to coddle his feelings you can put him ahead of Huff on the depth chart, it’s not like Huff has earned anything.. Who gives a crap if Huff has to see hmself listed as #4 on the depth chart? Tôugh shit, do something to earn your spot Mr. huff
    I think SPROLES cares more about being on the field, than what you technically list him as on the depth chart.. And regardless how he is listed he will be used primarily in the passing game, and won’t be running the ball like he did under chip, even if you keep listing him as a RB
    Hate the Thought of having to add two WRs this offseason, and SPROLES already told us keepimg all 3 RB’s will be a PROBLEM!!

  231. 231 Gian GEAGLE said at 2:52 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    A little disrespectful to Barwin who has like 20 sacks the past two years to call a “rotation guy”… Won’t be shocked if he plays more snaps than VINNY and BG… NEED 4 Edge rushers that can play, and that’s if none of the 4 get injured,

  232. 232 Gian GEAGLE said at 2:57 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Not sure malcolm Jenkins agrees to an extension if we don’t bring back Sam… Doubt he waste the end of his prime rebuilding with a rookie QB when his value is probably higher than ever coming off two good years in Philly

  233. 233 Nick C said at 3:00 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Jenkins has already said he wants to be next on the extension train. Could be posturing… none of us know. This is just my ideal situation (without be outright ridiculous) and also proving we can afford to keep Sam comfortably.

  234. 234 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:05 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Maybe he does feel that way. I hope he does… But that could change if he sees SAM Leave, and we decide to spend the rest of his prime with a rookie..
    Hopefully he gets extended ASAP so we don’t even have to worry about how he will feel about our QB situation… We KNOW we want Jenkins here no matter what happens at QB, so I hope we extend him..hopefully he feels the same way regardless of our QB..
    I think Jenkins is appearing as a Guest on CSN tonight

  235. 235 Nick C said at 3:09 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I dont live near Philly so let me know how that goes.

  236. 236 Media Mike said at 4:46 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    All plausible except extending Sproles.

    But very solid work.

  237. 237 Nick C said at 5:10 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Yeah the Sproles situation is tricky. I would much rather not cut/trade him, but I cannot see him back at his current figure as the 3rd RB. I know it is a bit criminal to just call him a RB, but still. I wouldn’t mind a Demeco Ryans’ like restructure where the cap is spread out over two years, but there is probably very little chance Darren will accept that.

  238. 238 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:17 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Still no word on Shady arrest?

  239. 239 A_T_G said at 3:23 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    My sources tell me they are waiting on negotiations. If the Bills agree to a Taylor for Sanchez trade the Philly police will look the other way on Shady.

  240. 240 Julescat said at 3:23 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    it’s obvious he paid off the jock sniffing corrupt philly politicians. Philly’s drunk mayor even said “Shady will have to pay for his actions”.

    the city is a cesspool of legal corruption. A girl goes to prison for misdemeanor assault for calling a gay guy a name and 4 football players aren’t even arrested for putting two cops in the hospital with serious injuries.

  241. 241 A_T_G said at 3:27 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    God, I hope that doesn’t turn out to be true. I just assumed the prosecutors were being careful because they know Shady will have expensive lawyers.

  242. 242 Media Mike said at 4:46 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    That “girl” is a violent piglet of a human being who used her father’s job as a police chief to act as if the law doesn’t apply to her.

    She deserves every minute of jail time she received for her actions.

    But I agree if the Shady bunch isn’t arrested for gang stomping those cops it would a gross miscarriage of justice.

    I just wouldn’t use Ms. Knott as an example of wrong application of the law.

  243. 243 Julescat said at 5:06 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    the point is that if misdemeanor non violent assaults result in 5 to 10 months in jail then why no arrests for Shady?

    the Ms. Knott case was bad law and allowed to be influenced by the media and pandering drunk mayor.

    It appears that application of the law is subjective to non-existent in philly. Illegal immigrants can do what they want but white suburbanites get railroaded. thug pro athletes do what ever they can bribe their way out of.

  244. 244 Media Mike said at 5:17 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Well bless your heart.

  245. 245 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:24 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    My skeptical nature makes me can’t help to wonder if Elway has anything to do with the ugly Peyton Manning story resurfacing NOW after all the years… The timing is curious.. Why not break this story during media Super Bowl week for Maximum exposure?
    Waiting Til after the super bowl for this old story to come out sure sounds convenient for Elway who has a young QB in Osweiler he doesn’t want to lose in Free agency, while Peyton seems to possibly be dragging his feet on Retirment… We know Elways hopes Peyton retires, the timing of This story making news after all these years makes me wonder if it’s going to help Nudge Peyton into retirment instead of coming back, remaining n the public eye and have to answer constant questions about THis ugly incident from his college days..
    Who benefits from the timing? ELWAY! If the victims wanted to benefit the most from this, they would have put it out there during media week when the entire world was watching, nstead of a week after the Super Bowl.. Why wasn’t the story brought back up after Peyton won his first Super Bowl for the Colts? Why Now? Who benefits from this timing? Might be a reach, but the only person benefitting from this curious timing is ELWAY!!! He probably had,NOTHNG to do with it, but timing is curious

  246. 246 Julescat said at 3:29 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Elway wants to move on and force Manning to retire

  247. 247 A_T_G said at 3:56 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Maybe. The King article said that a reader who was frustrated about the over-reaction to Cam walking away from the podium posted a comment about the reports in his Twitter and he ran with it from there.

    I guess that person could have been a Bronco agent, but it seems kind of cloak and dagger to me.

  248. 248 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:59 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Amazing how much pull the Manning family has to get this story BURRIED for all these years

  249. 249 A_T_G said at 4:26 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    That is the truly shocking part of this.

  250. 250 Greg Richards said at 5:01 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    It hasn’t been buried. This was reported YEARS ago.

  251. 251 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:28 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    When a story like THIS is reported TWICE yet no one cares and the story never “Grows any Legs”., THATS BURRIED!

  252. 252 botto said at 5:59 PM on February 23rd, 2016:

    it sure wouldn’t have happened if it were Cam for example. it would have never been overlooked would it have?

  253. 253 Mr. Magee said at 7:52 PM on February 16th, 2016:


  254. 254 SteveH said at 3:59 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Here’s something I’m sure people will find problems with. Again this is for a class at school so don’t hate my lack of expertise.

  255. 255 Insomniac said at 4:06 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    No love for Bradley Fletcher?

  256. 256 SteveH said at 4:08 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    It was a tough call between him, Trotter and Jarrad Page. I went with the fan favorite ultimately.

  257. 257 Media Mike said at 4:40 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I’m an 80s through now guy with the team, so I can’t speak to a lot of the Vermeil and prior guys other than Concrete Charlie.

    Your top 6 are excellent players. No quibble.

    Trotter is flat out one of the most overrated players by fans because he was so good for fans. Trotter is great on the radio, gracious in person, and was involved in a lot of exciting moments for a team we all grew to love………………but he was very mediocre in many aspects of his game. If I had a dollar for every time Trot ran 100 mph to the wrong gap and then left open a huge cutback lane for the RB, I’d be a millionaire. He was a very instinctual football player with some very poor instincts. Another reason Trotter is remembered in a manner greater than his overall level of talent is that the guys who replaced him were pure trash. Like Cam Newton fan trash. Like sewage dump type trash.

    Byron Evans, William Thomas, Andre Watters, Wes Hopkins, Clyde Simmons, Carlos Emmons, Troy Vincent, and Bobby Taylor were all better players than Trotter.

    Thank you for taking the time to put a list together that was a great read.

  258. 258 SteveH said at 5:26 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Fair enough. I have a soft spot for the Axe Man.

  259. 259 Anders said at 5:51 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Troy Vincent, Sheldon brown, Samuel, Cole, are a few guys better than trotter IMO

  260. 260 xmbk said at 6:06 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Samuel career, maybe. Samuel as an Eagle? No.

  261. 261 Media Mike said at 6:11 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    You don’t like pick 6s? Shame on you!

  262. 262 Greg Richards said at 5:18 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Bears cut OT Jermon Bushrod.

    Lions cut RB Joique Bell.

  263. 263 Media Mike said at 5:18 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    One turnstile and one missing person.

  264. 264 ACViking said at 5:41 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Re: Playing Tag with Bradford

    Put yourself in Bradford and Condon’s position.

    Assume the Eagles tag Bradford — as some folks here want (for various reasons, including the theory Condon will be forced to negotiate a team-friendly deal).

    So, now tagged, what do Bradford-Condon do?

    1. They can choose *not* to sign the tag and — instead — try to line up a tag-and-trade deal.

    The Eagles, obviously, could stop Bradford by refusing the trade — trying to force him to play in Philadelphia. Or make the deal. Or get stuck ’cause no team is interested in a tag-and-trade on the Eagles’ terms (if that was the Eagles’ purpose).

    2. Bradford can threaten to sit out the 2016 season, hoping the Eagle will rescind the tag at some point.

    If the Eagles did rescind, it would probably occur — as with Jeremiah Trotter and Corey Simon — after teams have addressed their principal needs (like QB) and spent much of their free agent budget.

    Sound like something that would happen to Tom Condon?

    3. Or Bradford can promptly sign the tender locking the Eagles in to a 1-year guaranteed deal for nearly $20 million in 2016.

    And much, much more.

    From Condon’s point of view, once the Eagles play tag in 2016, what incentive does his client Bradford have to sign a 2-year deal for anything less than close to $44 million guaranteed at signing?

    Or a 3-year deal much less than than $78 million guaranteed at signing.

    Why would Condon demand so much? (And fairly expect to get close to it.)

    Because, once the Eagles tag Bradford and he signs, the Eagles have now guaranteed — at a minimum — that if the team wants to
    bring Bradford back for 2017, then Bradford has to be tagged
    *again*. Same for 2018.

    The tag in 2017 would be at least about $24 million — 120% increase.
    In 2018, the QB tag would cost at least about $34M — 144% increase.

    Sure Bradford may want continuity.

    The problem is, once the Eagles use the tag, the team has no leverage with Bradford to sign a 3-year team-friendly deal (defined as something less than $60 MM fully guaranteed at signing).

    You can do the same exercise with the “transition tag” and save a few dollars.
    But the power of compounding favors Condon and Bradford.

    Maybe the outcome’s different if another team’s willing to pay Bradford more than the Eagles . . . .

    But in the meantime, the Eagles are in limbo at the QB position, waiting to see what happens with Bradford.

    Now, maybe Bradford’s not so good in 2016 or he’s injured again.

    So he moves on — which is what he may have wanted anyway.

    Or maybe the Eagles move on, despite Bradford’s interest in a cheap deal.

    Or maybe the Eagles keep him at a bargain rate commensurate with a lousy performance or more injuries.

    But right now — because it’s impossible to know what’ll happen in 2016 — from Condon’s perspective (and Roseman’s, too, I’d bet), if the Eagles tag Bradford, the baseline for any multi-year contract — whether 2 or 3 or 5 years, doesn’t matter — will start far north of $20 million per year.

    The logic of the tag dictates Condon asking for huge money.

    So if you’re Roseman and Lurie, isn’t the play to let Bradford shop himself on the market?

    Not gamble with the tag?

  265. 265 A_T_G said at 5:48 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    And you didn’t even mention the part where Bradford throws intentional interceptions to get safely to the sideline…

  266. 266 ACViking said at 6:20 PM on February 16th, 2016:


    My bad . . . .

  267. 267 Anders said at 5:49 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    The fact that Bradford might be long term injured again and unless he plays well, his market will dismiss a lot. If he plays well, he will get the money, but why should the eagles take the risk when they can just tag two years in a row for 44 total with zero downside if Bradford stinks this year

  268. 268 Media Mike said at 5:53 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    That could completely work.

  269. 269 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:02 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Threat of Tagging him two years in a row should also be enough to not threaten us to not sigń it… More than half his career has been lost to injury, I doubt he is in any position to play chicken and threaten sitting out a year or two… And if he threatens to hold out and not come to mini camps, then he won’t Learm the new offense, which is his right and his Leverage, but if he goes that route it will probably effect his play which he can’t afford until he signs,a multi year extension…
    If bradford isn’t our QB, Roseman had better claw and scratch and make his agent miserable trying to get away, On some clinger Ex Girlfriend Ish.

  270. 270 ACViking said at 6:26 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I’ve written before . . . .

    If the Eagles must tag Bradford again in 2017, the team cannot use the threat of the tag — let alone the tag — when negotiating with other players.

    Do the Eagles have anyone worth threatening from the 2013 draft class? Doesn’t appear to be the case.

    That leaves the question of paying Bradford as if he’s among the best QBs in football.

    Can the Eagles afford to do that? I guess so, assuming a growing cap.

    Do the Eagles want to? Apparently, “no.”

    These are hard calls, no question.

  271. 271 Fufina said at 6:28 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Dunno we might need to tag this guy called Cox if he has not been extended.. he might be quite good.

  272. 272 Mr. Magee said at 7:49 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Don’t get why Eagles have to pay Bradford like he’s just won a SB when he hasn’t… If that is in fact the case, for some reason – and no, I didn’t read your long post that supports this logic – then I’m more than happy to spend the money elsewhere and take our chances on somebody else.

    Btw, as I’m sure others have pointed out, Bradford has to weigh optimizing his pay with optimizing success and overall job enjoyment. They may or may not be mutually exclusive concepts for him, who knows. But if I were advising him, and given how much money he has already made, I would suggest he seriously consider the system and coaching staff in evaluating any current or future NFL home.

  273. 273 Dave said at 6:52 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    AC, you’re not taking into account how he plays next year if he is tagged. If Bradford plays the year out on the tender, 1 of 2 most likely scenarios will present themselves. Either Bradford plays lights out and shows he is the real deal. In that case, he is worth the money and Howie will gladly pay to have a franchise QB locked up long term. Scenario 2 is that he is good, so so, bad, or injured, which makes letting him go next year the likely outcome if his contract demands stay the same.

    The problem right now is that most would agree he has the skillset to be a franchise QB, its just that his contract demands are based on potential and projections, not past performances. Next year, if he doesn’t get injured, with the caching and talent around him, we shouldn’t have to project anymore.

  274. 274 Mac said at 7:15 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Just like what Tommy did with this article (and many commenters seem to have missed). The real trial of 2016 may be how well Pederson coaches up qbs. And if that is the real question, then the next question of how much to spend on Bradford becomes pretty clear.

    Teams have two limited resources to manage when building a team; Free agency (with a salary cap) and the draft (with limited picks).

    If I believe in Pederson’s ability to coach up a QB, I look at Bradford’s skinny legs and think… hmm… maybe I should get a less frail option rather than pay this cat all of our FA cap space.

    If I don’t believe in Pederson’s ability to coach up a QB, I look at Bradford’s skinny legs and think… why would I risk spending all our FA cap space on a guy who has a slim chance of improving beyond mediocre and is likely to get injured?

    If Bradford is willing to play ball and come back under a team friendly deal (which is probably less likely than Peyton Manning giving up his Pappa John’s contract), then that’s all good. We have our guy for 2016 and can work on a future with Pederson and Bradford.

    If he isn’t willing to play along, then he is cut loose and we’ll have to see what Roseman, Pederson, and Mr. Final Say to determine how to fill the QB role.

    In the mean time, let’s go sign Mitchell Schwartz and Jeff Allen so we have an Oline that doesn’t suck.

  275. 275 P_P_K said at 8:37 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Great post. Made me realize I had been thinking simplistically about the implications of tagging Sam.

    My question about Sam’s contract is not so much “What is he worth on the open market?” Rather, “What does the boss think he is worth to the team right now?”

    If Lurie thinks the Eagles are capable of being competetive in 2016 and he brought Pederson in to make that happen, then Sam is the guy and the question is a matter of money. I’m guessing that overpaying him, via contract or tag, might be a necessary evil. If Lurie and Roseman have a 3-5 year-plan that includes developing a young qb, and Pederson was brought in to oversee the plan, then goodbye to Sam.

    If they sign Sam and he plays lights-out, by this time next year we’ll be celebrating the foresight of the FA and the money will be forgotten. If he is mediocre or gets hurt, he could become the Eagles version of Ryan Howard and his contract could stall the team for years to come. As you wrote elsewhere, these are, indeed, hard calls.

  276. 276 Media Mike said at 6:01 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    So why not a draft……………

    Your score is: 7969 (GRADE: A)

    Your Picks:
    Round 1 Pick 13: Ronnie Stanley, OT, Notre Dame (A+)
    Round 3 Pick 14: Landon Turner, OG, North Carolina (A+)
    Round 3 Pick 16: Tyler Boyd, WR, Pittsburgh (A+)
    Round 4 Pick 15: Jihad Ward, DE, Illinois (B)
    Round 5 Pick 14: Evan Boehm, C, Missouri (A)
    Round 5 Pick 23: Rashard Robinson, CB, LSU (A-)
    Round 6 Pick 13: Matt Ioannidis, DT, Temple (B+)
    Round 7 Pick 12: Aaron Green, RB, TCU (A+)
    Round 7 Pick 30: Brandon Doughty, QB, Western Kentucky (B+)

  277. 277 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:06 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    If the Ravens pass on Ronnie, might be a good idea to trade up a few,spots and snatch him up around #10, rather than risk him Not making it to 13, if he is Truly a top Tier Tackle prospect

  278. 278 Media Mike said at 6:13 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    That might not be too expensive, but we lack ammo.

  279. 279 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:14 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Definitely a Problem, chip left us with no second round pick,and a QB mess on our hands

  280. 280 Will:↑↑↓↓←→←→BA said at 6:15 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    They might if Ramsey is there

  281. 281 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:19 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Doubt he would last that long, especially if he makes the combine his Bitch like most are expecting… Allegedly he is #1 on Cowboys board..GuS Bradley could be salivating over him
    But with the Ravens probably losing Keleche Osmele in free agency, might be hard for them to pass on OL help… Osmele is really a Guard, but he saved their butts a lot with his ability to fill in at Tackle

  282. 282 Will:↑↑↓↓←→←→BA said at 6:22 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I forgot about Dallas. Yeah, good chance they take him if they don’t go QB.

  283. 283 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:24 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    selfishly, Im hoping he falls on his face at the combine, fails a drug test for Marijuana, and gets arrested for Public Urination all before the draft…

  284. 284 Will:↑↑↓↓←→←→BA said at 6:24 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Like that would stop Dallas

  285. 285 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:25 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Well played… You can drop the Mic and walk away after that

  286. 286 Fufina said at 6:18 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I just do not see us spending extra resources on a OT this draft, If he is BPA at 13 great pull the trigger, but this is a deep tackle draft, and there are some 2nd/3rd round guys who have good upsides with time to develop, which they would have with the Eagles.

    We do not need 2 elite tackle prospects really, the second tackle just needs to be good prospect with good upside.

  287. 287 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:20 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    ideally the Tackle prospect can start his rookie season at Guard

  288. 288 Will:↑↑↓↓←→←→BA said at 6:21 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I know people say that a lot but how common is it? I don’t think any of the top 5 Tackle prospect have much if any experience playing OG

  289. 289 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:22 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Kyle long off top of my head

  290. 290 Fufina said at 6:24 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Draft a guard to play guard imho, we need long term a starting OG, a swing G/C and a RT. The OG ideally starts in 2015, but the other 2 can be upside/raw guys.

    Problem with playing the tackle at guard is he is going to struggle in 2016, and then struggle again in 2017. Rather get the Tackle into being in a good situation to play RT of the future.

  291. 291 Mitchell said at 6:43 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Im not sure if he can honestly. Staley looks like a LT through and through. Very good at what he does but I dont see him fitting another role well.

  292. 292 Mac said at 6:22 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    This would be even better after we sign Schwartz in FA because we can probably find a good trade partner to get more draft ammo. Makes 13 more valuable.

  293. 293 Mac said at 6:52 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Where did Tuerk go?

  294. 294 Mr. Magee said at 7:40 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Sounds good to me…. You’re hired

  295. 295 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:07 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    “Tale of two season for SAM… Early he wasn’t that comfortable in the locker room or being the new leader of a new locker room, then he got injured, and when he came back he really took ownership of the team, and grew into that role and he started to play well, we really got behind SAM and he assumed the role of our leader and we definitely Hope he is back as our Leader”-Malcolm Jenkins

  296. 296 Greg Richards said at 7:18 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    Not really in the mood to debate this, but I figured some of you would find this interesting:

    Basically, for wage-and-tax purposes, college atheletes shouldn’t be classified as employees based on current federal law.

  297. 297 A_T_G said at 8:53 PM on February 16th, 2016:

    I honestly do not have a strong opinion on what to do with Bradford. I am very glad we gave Kelly his chance to get his QB and show what he could do. There are no what-ifs now. I want Pederson to have his choice of QBs, Sam or otherwse.

    The thing that surprises me in the conversation, though, is the lack of interest in a succession plan. When Mathis and Jackson were let go, the more reasoned responses still wished there had been a replacement in hand before discarding the guys that didn’t fit.

    Now, I see a lot of proponents for buying a band aid while grooming someone from the draft. Anyone. Go find a guy. What happens when we have our Russel Wilson lined up in the third and Seattle sweeps in and steals him? What happens when we are satisfied with any of the top three (which means we are wowed by none) and two are gone in the first 5 picks? What happens when we get our Peyton Manning but he turns out to be Ryan Leaf?

    And maybe the answer is we suck for a year and try again with better ammo. It just seems like a lot of faith is being put in Howie and the draft by a crowd that typically has very little.

  298. 298 D3FB said at 8:42 AM on February 17th, 2016:

    Everyone points to 2011 draft and laughs at Jax, Minn, and TEN.

    They all have their QBs now.

  299. 299 botto said at 5:04 PM on February 23rd, 2016:

    they do, but are they getting anywhere with them?

  300. 300 D3FB said at 9:30 PM on February 23rd, 2016:

    Min made the playoffs, and I think Teddy wasn’t really asked to do much. Having a defensive head coach is probably hurting him right now.

    Jax and Oaklands rosters were so bad that they had a long way to go but both are in a very good position moving forward. A couple of smart moves and they are both fringe playoff teams with young very good QBs.