JP Sticking Around

Posted: June 15th, 2017 | Author: | Filed under: Philadelphia Eagles | 93 Comments »

Jason Peters got an extension from the Eagles on Wednesday.

This is an interesting move by the Eagles. They already had Peters under contract so there was no real need to do this. They gained some cap space this year, but now have to keep Peters around another couple of years.

That’s great if he continues to play well, but there is always the possibility he will hit the wall and start to decline. Peters is a freak, being such a good LT for such a long time, but even he is human. I think. At some point, he will start to struggle against speed rushers. The Eagles can move him in to LG at that point, whether that is 2018 or 2019.

Peters’ extension does mean the Eagles have a boatload of money invested in their OL. That doesn’t bode well for the future of Jason Kelce. He’s got to know the writing is on the wall for him, likely next year, but possible this year.

One person who must be happy is Carson Wentz. He will have a good pair of OTs for the next couple of years. Randall Cunningham would have killed to play behind a LT like Peters.

The most fascinating bit of info was Peters referring to Jeffrey Lurie as his best friend. Les Bowen has more on that.

Peters made a point of thanking Eagles chairman Jeffery Lurie.

“We’re best friends. We talk all the time. He texts me, and we talk before every game. That’s my guy,” Peters said. “He brought me here, and he stayed loyal to me.”

Peters said Lurie is “away in Europe somewhere” but after agent Vincent Taylor initiated talks recently, Lurie “stood up for me and got the deal done.”

At the March NFL meetings in Arizona, Lurie talked of his friendship with Peters, how close they were. On the surface, a 65-year-old billionaire from Boston and a 35-year-old tackle from Texas wouldn’t seem to have all that much in common, but Lurie clearly treasures Peters as one of his franchise’s all-time greats. And Peters has made something like $80 million from Lurie since arriving in a 2009 trade.

What do they talk about?

“Football, life in general, you know,” Peters said.

Just as I predicted when watching tape of Peters playing TE at Arkansas in 2003. “I’ll be someday that kid will consider Jeff Lurie to be his best friend.” I have proof of that somewhere, but you can just take my word for it now. Right?

I love keeping Peters around. The only downside is the cap situation. The Eagles will need to do some shuffling next season to get under the cap. It might not be that hard, but having Peters big salary on the books won’t make things easy.

Still, it is nice to have this guy sticking around.


Peters has a couple of reasons for wanting the deal (besides money, of course).

He has never won a playoff game. His goal is winning the Super Bowl, but at the least he has to want to have some postseason success. Just getting to the playoffs is rewarding on some level, but you want to win. You want to make a run at a title. Peters is optimistic about the Eagles future.

JP also badly wants to make it to the Hall of Fame. I don’t think he’s there right now, but if he can play another three years, and the Eagles do have some postseason success, that will help his resume.

We all like money, but Peters wants more than just that.


93 Comments on “JP Sticking Around”

  1. 1 Greg Tulino said at 1:01 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Great move to make a great player happy. Lets hope he rewards us by giving us 2 more great years.

  2. 2 Call Me Carlos the Dwarf said at 1:56 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    The key, for me, is how much is guaranteed next year.

    If it’s under $6.6m in dead money, the rollover actually makes this a net positive, cap-wise.

  3. 3 Anders said at 2:30 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    There is 100% some funny money in here. Just as with Alshon

  4. 4 D3FB said at 8:07 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Alshon isn’t really funny money. It’s just $4mil is in performance bonuses and since he had a statistically poor season last year they are classified as NLTBE and therefore can be paid with next years cap.

  5. 5 RogerPodacter said at 10:59 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    thanks for clearing this up, i had been wondering how the team afforded him

  6. 6 Ark87 said at 11:19 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    It’s occurred to me that I don’t actually know what people are talking about when they bring up “funny money”

  7. 7 D3FB said at 11:31 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Giant ass balloon figures at the end of contracts when there is little to no guaranteed money left anymore.

  8. 8 bill said at 11:58 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Must resist temptation to google “giant ass balloon figures” and post a resulting image.

  9. 9 Anders said at 4:06 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    Some of those NLTBE are funny money because he most likely have bonus for lets say 10, 15, 20 TDs and we all know he wont reach 20 TDs.

  10. 10 Media Mike said at 5:57 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    If they cut him going into next year they’re eating (I think) 2/3rds of $8 mil ($5.33) + $1 mil (old deal) in cap charges.

  11. 11 增达网QQ-635563854 said at 3:00 AM on June 15th, 2017:


  12. 12 mheil said at 4:25 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    It is never a good idea when the owner sticks his nose into football decisions. Good owners hire the right people, give them the finances they need and get out of their way.

  13. 13 Tumtum said at 12:03 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    So since we have yet to see the numbers, and you are sure it was a bad decision, please fill me in as to why. Just because the owner endorsed it, or is there an actual reason?

  14. 14 mheil said at 2:35 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    My point is not that extending Peters was a bad decision since I have no idea, one way or the other. As you noted, I don’t know the numbers, Peter’s health, how age will effect his play and a lot more. However, football decisions should be made by the football people, which does not include Lurie. When Lurie starts contributing to football decisions, because he has a personal relationship with certain players, it is a mistake, even if Peter’s contract is fair to both sides. If they overpaid Peters because he is friends with the owner, it was a mistake. The personal relationship between the two men is concerning to me and raises these questions in my mind.

  15. 15 Ankerstjernen said at 4:59 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Football is all business. or at least it has to be if you want to win. But certain guys you just want on your team, period. And you dont really care if they cost a million or two too much. Peters is that guy. What he is doing is incredible, and the way he works and carries himself is as well. He is known to lead by example and when he speaks, everyone else shuts up and listens. In terms of locker-room presence I dont think anyone matters more than him, not even close. with that said, Im sure the reported money has incentives and escalators so that he will get paid less if they have to move him to guard to play out the contract – something he said just this week that he would be willing to do “if he started getting beat too much at tackle”.

  16. 16 Media Mike said at 6:25 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    The question is how important was placating Peters (as opposed telling him that he’s perfectly welcome to play for the $11mil+ he’s due in 2017 and 2018) vs. doing the Patriots thing and having the owner stay out of management’s way.

  17. 17 eagleyankfan said at 7:26 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    George Steinbrenner loved Arod. Crippled that team for years with his contract. Not saying it’s going to happen here, just an example of owner and player…

  18. 18 Media Mike said at 7:28 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    agree, same continuum / different point on it.

  19. 19 Ankerstjernen said at 7:59 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Yea, that is a good point about Jeffrey. It is a little concerning, depending on how they contract works out (we still don’t know). I get that. But then again, the Patriots are impossible to root for. I’d like the Eagles to not be that.

  20. 20 FairOaks said at 10:41 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    There is a possibility that the contract demanded a bit different actual cash flow (as opposed to cap money) than budgeted — i.e. maybe Lurie had to approve spending more actual money on a signing bonus this year, and stepped up to do that — rather than dictating to Roseman that Peters be given more guaranteed money and additional years. If so, that sort of “stood up for me” is fine. More troubling if Lurie insisted on this, to the detriment of Roseman’s cap planning.

    Lessening this year’s cap and moving it to next year doesn’t matter a whole lot — gives you flexibility right now, and if you have the discipline to not use it (or use it now, then gain it back later this year by trading/cutting someone), then you have the exact same cap space next year that you would have had. But it does sound like some of next year’s contract is guaranteed, so they are committing to him on the team next year (which they were not before).

  21. 21 Media Mike said at 5:55 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    “That’s great if he continues to play well, but there is always the possibility he will hit the wall and start to decline.”

    Yeah, that’ll be scary to eat a $6.33 million dead money cap charge in 2018 if the wheels fall off of Peters this year.

  22. 22 eagleyankfan said at 7:24 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    IMHO opinion – the chinks in his armor started to appear last year…maybe money recharges him a bit. Players play better when they are happy…

  23. 23 P_P_K said at 7:27 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    It does seem like Peters is on the descending arc of his career. But a guy with his experience and skills can play at 80% and still be a valuable contributor to the team. If his level of play drops below that, though, the deal will look foolish.

  24. 24 Media Mike said at 7:27 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    He’s still a pro bowl, but not all pro, level LT. I like having him there again this year. I don’t think he looked any worse than the year before, but I totally hear what you’re saying with some small flaws, etc. I just really don’t want to have to eat any overly large dead money on the guy if/when he’s not worth keeping through 2019.

  25. 25 eagleyankfan said at 7:29 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    without question. Love Peters. And he’ll give 110%. He’s still better than most tackles. like you said, it’s that possible dead money…

  26. 26 D3FB said at 8:05 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    I would have preferred they not done this but remember you have to subtract the 5 million in cap space they just opened up this year because it just rolls over (although they’ll likely use it to lock up Jerningan or Jeffery this fall) so it’s really more about some guaranteed cash for Peters. This doesn’t seem to effect the cap too much other than pushing money around.

  27. 27 Media Mike said at 6:54 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Cap is looking interesting for 2018. Given they still need to get Mathews cut for this year, it’ll improve a bit with money rolled into 2018. All in all, they’re going to need to get moving going into next year (or sooner in a few cases) on Smith, Kelce, Kendricks, Curry, and Celek. Keeping Alshon, Jernigan and extending Hicks is going to eat up a good deal of money going into 2018 as well.

    This is going to be interesting in terms of needing a lot of guys from this year’s draft to hit.

  28. 28 Ankerstjernen said at 8:48 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    It all sort of makes it a little interesting to speculate about Howie and Douglas possibly trying to game the compensatory picks system like the ravens usually do. For it to work out, ideally they should try and get all the free agents to walk in the same year, since spreading them out will mean that they get annulled by new signings that are coming in. That year, where they all leave, you dont sign anyone new.

    I know it is somewhat far fetched, and I dont really think that this is a strategy – the league is too unpredictable to scheme that out in advance. But if you wanted to try and do it, what Howie has been doing this offseason is exactly how you would go about it – sign a number of free agents on 1-year deals, trade for guys with one year left on their deals and max out your salary cap with signings this year, since you wont need the rollover next year to sign new FA’s. 2018 looks like a good year to try and let a lot of guys walk to get decent contracts elsewhere without signing new ones.

  29. 29 Rellihcs said at 9:36 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Which Smith are you talking about? And why? Regardless of your opinion of either of them, neither will have a significant cap implication no matter what…

  30. 30 FairOaks said at 10:51 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    I think he’s saying to cut Marcus Smith, so we don’t pay the roster bonus and get the cap room back. For most of the others, it doesn’t matter when they are cut (if they are), though Media Mike is not known for patience on cutting players he doesn’t think are worth the cap hit… 😉

  31. 31 Rellihcs said at 10:54 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Thanks. But isn’t the $ we save if we cut Smith soon pretty darn minimal and essentially inconsequential given that we don’t have cap problems for this year, and he’s not on the team next year unless we extend him anyway?

  32. 32 FairOaks said at 12:32 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    I think we save $1.5 million if we cut him. He has a $600K roster bonus early in training camp, and a non-guaranteed 900K salary. If he’s on the fringe of the roster, and not really in the future plans, it may not be worth seeing how he does in training camp since that 600K will be charged to the cap even if they cut him in the end. It’s not a ton but it does add up. If we don’t spend it this year, it rolls over and is available next year. If we keep Smith, that money is not available next year.

    Obviously, if Smith doesn’t make the roster, another player will and there is a minimum salary there, but probably less than Smith. If there is no other DE you like, maybe it’s worth keeping him — he had to switch to a 4-3 and maybe given another year he’s better at it. Of course, he skipped voluntary camp so the coaches weren’t given much of a chance to see if he’s better at anything.

  33. 33 Rellihcs said at 12:41 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Got it. I’m not sure if 1.5 mil this year makes much of a difference one way or another.

  34. 34 Media Mike said at 5:58 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Marcus. And yes, the $ for him is low. But it does count on the total.

  35. 35 ColorSgt said at 10:19 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    “He has never won a playoff game.”
    This hit me like a ton of bricks. I really hope he can win a bunch now.

  36. 36 Sb2bowl said at 1:56 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Crazy to think our last playoff win was in 2008.

  37. 37 P_P_K said at 3:02 PM on June 15th, 2017:


  38. 38 izzylangfan said at 10:35 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    In my opinion this photo shows why Wentz’ passes tend to sail. A pass will sail when the nose is pointing up when the ball is in flight- it like an airplane wing. The picture shows the flaw in Wentz’ mechanics. Instead of bringing the ball straight back to his shoulder Wentz has the ball away from his body ( which is also part of his fumble problem) with his wrist pointing the ball backwards. In order to throw he has to not only bring his arm forward but twist his wrist to have the ball pointing in the right direction. But the sudden torsion of th wrist makes it difficult to stay on top of the ball and the the nose of the football ends up pointing up and you get passes that sail or become wobbling ducks. Pictures from last year are even worse where is arm is more away from his body and the ball is pointing down, so he has improved his upper body mechanics already. But it could be difficult to change this right away. It might take a lot of reps before the correct muscle memory sets in.

  39. 39 Rellihcs said at 10:52 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    I think we are making 100000000% too much about this. He worked on his form this summer with the guru, has good staff here for that (3 former NFL QBs in Filipo, Doug, and Frank), and really hasn’t had major issues in games with this. We were complaining about drops (and overall lack of talent/quality play) from the WRs last year, not bad QB throws. Improved offense all around him, plus not a rook anymore and fair to assume some improvement this year with development/things not being new.

    So good in-depth analysis, but totally unnecessary to worry about this at all now.

  40. 40 BlindChow said at 10:57 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    No, there was definitely concern over bad throws; he sailed plenty of passes last year, the most concerning of which were when he wasn’t even under pressure.

    I do think the bad WR corps overshadowed those issues (plus there was a lot of rabid defensiveness whenever someone deigned to question The Highly-Drafted Franchise Savior).

  41. 41 Rellihcs said at 11:01 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    I’m not saying that he doesn’t need to work on form and the overthrows. I’m saying he is working on it – with at least 4 experts. And it’s unnecessary for us fans who have no say or power, to harp on something that is being addressed with multiple top-level interventions.

  42. 42 ChoTime said at 6:19 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Dude, really. Top QBs get $20 mil a year and disproportional glory when the team wins. I think microanalyzing, and lots of harping, rightfully comes with the package.

  43. 43 Media Mike said at 6:49 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    “I think microanalyzing, and lots of harping, rightfully comes with the package.”

  44. 44 Rellihcs said at 8:29 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    I am not at all saying Carson can’t handle it.

  45. 45 Tumtum said at 11:19 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Meh. Just seems like solid analysis to me.

  46. 46 Sean Stott said at 12:42 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    “I think we are making 100000000% too much about X.

    Your first offseason?

  47. 47 Bert's Bells said at 10:45 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    “JP & Jeffrey” is going to be the buddy comedy blockbuster of 2017.

  48. 48 ChoTime said at 10:47 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Reminds me… OT: A clickbait site informed me that Danny Glover is an A-hole. Say it ain’t so.

  49. 49 Bert's Bells said at 10:51 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    I was thinking more of a Kenon Thompson/Anthony Anderson type -but Glover would be great as JP’s Giants fan dad.

  50. 50 Media Mike said at 6:54 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Is that after the JPP horror movine comes out July 4th?

  51. 51 Insomniac said at 10:47 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    That’s my LT :'(

  52. 52 Ark87 said at 11:02 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Jason Peters is one of my favorite players. This deal doesn’t seem smart, but I really hope it works out.

    The JP-Lurie connection is one of those pleasant surprises. Easy to see Lurie considering JP to be one of his favorite players, he’s such a great football player, one of the most respected people in the lockroom, and he genuinely seems to like and take care of his guys (only time you see him get mean and go after someone is when you mess with his guys). Harder to see how JP considers some old white dude among his closest friends. I suppose they both love football, both love the team maybe, JP seems to be a savvy guy maybe they talk about money/business? Seems like they’re both desperate to win the big game sooner than later. I dunno, it’s a pleasant surprise though.

    Really want to get JP to the hall though. Second only to getting Dawk in.

  53. 53 D3FB said at 11:38 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    9 Pro Bowls, 6 All-Pros (3time first team)

    I’d say he’s got a pretty strong case if he doesn’t play another snap. He and Joe Thomas should both make it easily. Both are arguably top 5 at the position all time certainly top 10.

    I’d probably say its:
    5. Pace

  54. 54 Ark87 said at 12:10 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    I agree with you. I just hope his accomplishments are recognized. Joe Thomas is (almost) a household name, famously the only good thing the Browns had for over a decade, but I could talk to my friend down the hall who is a die-hard football fan (specifically Bears fan but well informed by being fanatical about fantasy football) and he’d be hard pressed to tell you who Jason Peters is. He’s just not famous. And I’m worried that in the age of fantasy football, offensive lineman will further fall into obscurity (this is years down the line from possibly being a problem).

    I think his resume is good enough, but this is a place where John Lynch gets in before Brian Dawkins.

  55. 55 D3FB said at 8:29 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    Fortunately it’s writers not fans that vote. Peters was a pretty prominent LT. I feel better about his case than say a Marshall Yanda.

    Other factors that help are that Steve Hutchinson is pretty much the only OL currently on the waiting list (becomes eligible in 18) so Peters should hit eligibility without a ton of crowding or backlog at the position.

    Agreed that Lynch over BDawk is bullshit

  56. 56 Allen3000 said at 8:17 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    At first glance, my initial thought was “what about Walter Jones???” He’s a HOF and was one of the more gifted Tackles I’ve watched in my lifetime. But then I looked at career accomplishments and his resume is nearly identical to Peters’s (9 pro-bowls and 6 all-pro selections/ 4 x 1st team all pro). Jones is a HOF so I can guess we should assume at this point that Peters will be a lock too?

    Homerism aside, when Peters was his peak, there is no one I’d take over him aside from maybe Munoz or Ogden. He was just an absolute stone wall mauler. There were times when our QBs would have literally 10-15 seconds or more to get rid of the ball and lot of that could be attributed to Peters.

  57. 57 laeagle said at 11:46 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    I’m curious how those who are opposed to this move felt when we released Dawkins a number of years ago. Very similar situation, very different outcome. If you’re saying this is a bad idea, were you saying that it was good when they released Dawk? Because if you’re not/weren’t, then I think you’ve got some ‘splainin’ to do.

  58. 58 Rob Jarratt said at 11:54 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Very well stated, Iaeagle. Of course, it’s a calculated risk, but so is the life we choose to lead. Peters brings leadership and continuity to the offensive line, and if he loses a step, sliding over the guard is a viable option.

  59. 59 Rellihcs said at 11:55 AM on June 15th, 2017:

    Not sure that this is THAT similar, it’s not at all about the player leaving or not… so….

    But I hear you.

  60. 60 Insomniac said at 12:00 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Putting aside homerism and player bias, just look at the contracts all of these crappy LTs are getting compared to Peters.

    Jason Peters – 3yr/32.5mil/15.5mil guaranteed
    Matt Kalil – 5yr/55mil/25mil guaranteed
    Riley Reiff – 5yr/58.5mil/26mil guaranteed

    Also in LT news

    Assuming Peters can maintain similar levels of play then he’s worth it.

  61. 61 Sb2bowl said at 1:54 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    I think Whitworth is probably the closest comp to Peters in age and skill level. He got this on the open market to play in LA, but this is probably where the Eagles structure their contract after……

  62. 62 Tumtum said at 12:05 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    I think everyone should see the actual numbers before making a decision.

  63. 63 Dave said at 2:08 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Dawk signed a 7 year $43M deal with the Eagles at 29 years old…~$6M per year.

    At 35, the Eagles offered him a 2 year $5M contract while the Broncos offer was a 2 year $9M contract (with funny money for the final 3 years as Dawk took a paycut to stay with Denver for a third year at $2M).

    If I remember correctly, no other team was offering Dawk a contract at all. Denver had just hired Josh McDaniels, who had famously traded Jay Cutler (and hitched his wagon to Tim
    Tebow in the first round a year later). He was looking for leadership and Dawk jumped at the money. McDaniels and the Broncos vastly overpaid to get Dawk.

    I was fine with the decision then and I am still fine with the decision now.

  64. 64 SteveH said at 5:43 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Dawk played about 1.5 more years of good ball (GOOD ball, not pro bowl ball) before he fell off, was good safety play not worth at least the 4.5 million it would have cost us? Hell he probably would have even taken a little less but the Eagles didn’t even put in a competitive offer.

  65. 65 Dave said at 7:13 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    “…but the Eagles didn’t even put in a competitive offer.”

    Dawk was not a good safety at that point. He was 35 years old and a liability in coverage.

    His agent was negotiating a 2-year deal to stay in Philly when McDaniels was hired and made signing Dawkins a priority.

    To get Dawk to leave Philadelphia and go to a non-contending team, the Broncos had to overpay dearly. The Josh McDaniels era in Denver was a catastrophe in personnel acquisitions via free and agency and the draft. The Broncos signed a whopping 14 free agents that offseason and traded for Kyle Orton after a Matt Cassel trade fell apart.

    The Eagles offer may not have been competitive with Denver’s, but it was reasonable considering his age and eroding skills.

  66. 66 ColorSgt said at 12:33 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Dawkins is without question my favorite player. His last season in Philly, he seemed to have lost a step. As much as I hated to see him go, i kind of understood why the Eagles were moving on. Looking back, I wish they would have extended him. As for Peters, im glad he’s playing out the rest of his time in Philly. Right now he still has it, and If he has to kick into playing guard that’s cool too. I just hope Howie worked the numbers in the Eagles favor. What concerns me are the reports that Lurie involved himself on this one.

  67. 67 Bert's Bells said at 1:44 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Dawkins wasn’t released.

  68. 68 A Roy said at 1:26 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    As far as I’m concerned, Peters gained a ton of good will when he stood up for Foles after that cheap shot by Washington’s Chris Baker in 2014. If we get one excellent year at LT and either one as okay LT or one as good LG, I’m satisfied.

  69. 69 P_P_K said at 3:01 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    When he went after Baker, he placed himself in my Philly Sports Hall of Fame. I maintain that JP at 80% is better than almost all other LTs at 100%

  70. 70 A Roy said at 4:02 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Concur. And he was still > 80% last year.

  71. 71 Ark87 said at 3:59 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    Didn’t he go after someone that put a late hit on Wentz too? Or maybe Bradford? Either way the old bear is a protector. You mess with his dudes, he’s coming for you.

  72. 72 Media Mike said at 5:57 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    True. That was excellent. Chris Baker and Troy Vincent (for not suspending Baker) are on the villain list for life as well.

  73. 73 daveH said at 11:30 PM on June 15th, 2017:

    By now i must have seen Kaepernick’s fave literally 500 times ..i just don’t care that his career is over ..maybe 10 months ago but no longer ..
    TLaw you write new material several times a week and this story stalking our every visit here is old, inconsequential,abusive, mindless and true torture ..
    Tommy ya gotta fight for us and block that ignorant ad schit.. its demeaning to you r hats work and all our interest in what you do

  74. 74 Rellihcs said at 8:09 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    Hey, lay off Tommy, and for the record – the ads are on you bro. I got none.

  75. 75 eagleyankfan said at 8:19 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    lmao. Someone on here last year was complaining about adult ads popping up….ummm….yeah….

  76. 76 Rellihcs said at 8:25 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    Ha. Yeah, that’s a whole other level… Penis pill ordering does a computer bad. Or so I’ve learned from my friends.

  77. 77 A_T_G said at 5:31 PM on June 16th, 2017:

    I keep getting ads for modeling jobs, PhD programs, and trophy cases. So strange…

  78. 78 Rellihcs said at 6:01 PM on June 16th, 2017:

    Once i purchased the dwluxe spare mansion storage kit, i stopped getting any more ads

  79. 79 daveH said at 10:58 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    No its not on me. . Its on a spying algo.
    Ok it knows what i like .. yeah sure
    Its ignorant click bait schit that demands this website.
    I am defending TLaw

  80. 80 daveH said at 11:00 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    You have no ads ?

  81. 81 Rellihcs said at 11:09 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    Are you talking about popups or just the ones in between Tommy’s post and the comments and on the sides?

    If it’s the later, Tommy’s gotta make money off of this somehow, and since they are in predictable/consistent spots, just ignore them. And if you see click bait, don’t take the bait.

  82. 82 daveH said at 6:45 PM on June 16th, 2017:

    No popups.
    .. only the placed ones that know my tendancies so well they slap my ‘fro with the same constant kapernick story..
    I ignore but Every now and then i break ..
    Not sure how the brilliant algo reads my needs so well, i only bisit 3 websites:
    Desi Hotties

  83. 83 Rellihcs said at 8:26 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    Stop being chris baker.

  84. 84 daveH said at 11:00 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    Googling him now … but it cant be a compliment

  85. 85 Rellihcs said at 11:11 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    I’m not trying to be a schmuck. Promise.

    He is the washington football player who took a cheap shot at Foles which prompted Jason Peters to go after him and get ejected from that game a few years ago.

    I was making a metaphor about me protecting Tommy and you being aggressive toward him.

  86. 86 daveH said at 6:40 PM on June 16th, 2017:

    Got it .. yeah i dont like that skins guy either.
    But im just trying to protect Tommy’s awesome igglesblitz. .
    These brainless ads demean him.
    ok i get how they work,
    but the reality is the internet algo is insulting..
    there is nothing ive done to deserve seeing the same photo of kapernick so much … i only visit 3 websites:
    Desi Hotties
    So where does this brilliant algo gets its big data

  87. 87 A_T_G said at 12:42 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    I am surprised to find I like this move. Immediately I thought of Dawkins, as was discussed early in this thread. I agree that Denver overpaid Dawk and that the correct financial decision was to let him walk and spend that money on younger guys who had not lost a step.

    And what did it get us?

    A hole that took years to fill at safety. Fans that had to watch the face of the franchise in another uniform. A team with a leadership vacuum and a defense where players thought they could decide when tackling was a good idea. Very little success and enough money to sign who? Marlon whatever? Bradley? I can’t even remember.

    We are treating Peters how we should have treated Dawkins, and he earned it.

  88. 88 sonofdman said at 4:03 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    I feel exactly the same way. While I don’t generally like the owner being involved in decisions like this, it tells me that Lurie learned from the Dawkins situation and doesn’t want it playing out the same way with Peters.

  89. 89 Ankerstjernen said at 5:35 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    You also have to presume that Peters is a player of immense pride. If he really falls off and starts getting beat, he will want to move to guard or retire himself. I don’t see him wanting to compromise his team just to squeeze out a little more dough. He has made almost a hundre mill at this point. Guys like him worry about winning trophies and cementing their legacy. I think we will have him for as long as he can help out the team and not any longer than that. Which is worth the money in this deal for sure.

  90. 90 Dave said at 7:19 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    Apples to oranges.

    People forget how much of a liability Dawk was in coverage in the 2008 season, or that he missed 6 games in the 2007 season.

    Peters is still very much playing at a high level.

  91. 91 Rellihcs said at 8:10 AM on June 16th, 2017:

    The Dawkins comparison is weak. His contract was up. Peters’ wasn’t. So, that’s a HUGE difference. Just sayin…

    But yeah, I’m cool with this. It’s not gonna hurt much, and we have a cap wiz. Plus, when we win the SB this year, it will all be millions of dollars under the bridge…

  92. 92 A_T_G said at 5:25 PM on June 16th, 2017:

    But Dawkins deal should never have run out. This is how they should have handled Dawkins situation BEFORE he reached the point where Denver could make a silly offer.

  93. 93 Rellihcs said at 5:28 PM on June 16th, 2017:

    Fair enough