Middle Ground

Posted: February 22nd, 2016 | Author: | Filed under: Philadelphia Eagles | 205 Comments »

Let’s talk about a former #1 overall pick. He was a terrific college QB. He played in a spread system and had to adapt to a pro-style offense. Injuries, bad coaching and being on the wrong team all contributed to make this player look like a bust.

But in his 7th season, things finally fell his way. He suddenly had the right teammates and the right coaches. He had the best year of his career. Since then, he hasn’t been on a losing team or had a QB rating under 89.

Who is this? Alex Smith.

I mention this because the subject of Sam Bradford is so polarizing we often forget there is middle ground. Some people talk about how awful Bradford is. Others point to his final 7 games of 2015 and talk about him as a Super Bowl
QB. He’s not awful and he’s not one of the best QBs in the league. Being somewhere in the middle is okay.

When I wrote the post about limited options for Sam Bradford recently, some people took that the wrong way. “Well, if a bunch of teams don’t want him, why should the Eagles?”

The Houston Texans could use Sam Bradford in a major way. As I pointed out in that post, the feeling is that their owner wants to focus on a rookie QB. He’s tired of shuffling through veterans and wants a long term answer. I don’t think Bradford will be interested in going there as a one-year stop-gap QB. See the difference in that and saying Houston doesn’t think Bradford is any good?

I’ve heard Hue Jackson in Cleveland has his eyes on another veteran QB. That doesn’t mean he has no interest in Bradford. He very well might. There just happens to be another QB that he likes quite a bit.

When I wrote about the Niners, I focused on the fact I’m not sure Bradford would want to go there. From the outside, that team looks like it could be a mess. If Bradford loves Chip Kelly, maybe he’s interested. I just don’t think I would sign a long-term deal with that organization unless it was for huge money. And I’m not sure GM Trent Baalke would be willing to pay mega-bucks to Bradford.

I think the Jets would rather keep Ryan Fitzpatrick than go after Bradford. Fitzpatrick just played for them so they know him. He’s tight with their OC Chan Gailey. Why pursue an outsider when you can bring back your QB that just had a career best year? Now, if Fitzpatrick gets a good offer to go elsewhere, I think Bradford would be a key target for the Jets. I just tend to think Fitzpatrick will re-sign.

Denver could be interested in Bradford, but reportedly they want to re-sign Brock Osweiler. He is a player they drafted and developed. He’s younger. Trying to keep him makes sense.

The one team without a QB that could really use Bradford is the Rams. The problem is that he played there for years and things just didn’t work out. I doubt he has any interest in returning there and I doubt they would want to pay him big bucks to return.

The best fit for Bradford is re-signing with the Eagles. Howie Roseman has talked about wanting him back, but only at the right price. I think Roseman has surveyed the market and seen that Bradford has limited options. He’s not a QB that you pay $20 or $25M a year to. Not right now, at least. If you can get Bradford for $12 to $15M a year, suddenly he makes a lot more sense.

I doubt either side is in love with the idea of a long-term deal. There is some logic to Bradford signing for one or two years. There could be several more QB openings in 2016.

The point of all this is that the best option for the Eagles is Bradford and the best option for Bradford is the Eagles. That doesn’t make it a perfect marriage. That doesn’t mean there is going to be a 7-years, $150M contract. This is a “right here, right now” type of scenario. The Eagles could still spend the 13th pick on a QB to develop. If Bradford signs a short deal, he would still have the possibility of a long-term deal a year from now.

Bradford doesn’t have to turn into Aaron Rodgers to be successful. If he can at least be like Alex Smith (less mobile, but better arm), there is value in that.

I feel like Bradford will end up staying with the Eagles. I just can’t see any of the options out there offering him a huge deal based on 2015. Bradford showed promise, but he wasn’t an elite QB. If Bradford hates the Eagles and/or Philly and just wants out, that obviously changes things. But even then…are you going to love Cleveland or San Francisco?

I think the Eagles are playing this situation the right way. Bradford is someone you want back, at the right price. If you lose him to free agency, there are other short term options. The real key is for the Eagles to see if they can find a long term solution to the QB situation in the draft.


205 Comments on “Middle Ground”

  1. 1 HipEagle said at 8:28 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    My theory: I think BUF and DET are Bradford wild cards. Taylor may want too much. Stafford has no more guarantees left and is tradeable.

    I just think there are other Bradford teams that aren’t public.

  2. 2 Dave said at 8:36 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Stafford has an $11M cap hit if traded.

    No QB in their right mind would head to Buffalo to play for Rex.

  3. 3 Julescat said at 8:48 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Tyrod Taylor is a cheaper alternative for Buffalo

  4. 4 Gian GEAGLE said at 10:42 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Lol bills defenders DONT even want to play for Rex

  5. 5 FairOaks said at 10:06 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Taylor is signed through 2017 for peanuts (well, I think bonuses make it a lot more than that, but still very cheap for a starting QB). No chance unless they think Taylor’s year was an utter fluke and will turn into Foles this year.

    Stafford’s cap hit is 22.5 million, but they only get half of that in savings if they cut him, and Bradford will cost more than that so the cap hit of Bradford + dead money would be higher (in 2016 anyways). They have the cap space I guess but Bradford feels like a sideways move from Stafford at the very very best. They are the same age and Bradford hasn’t shown as much. Stafford just has his best statistical season in several years — if you’re losing when the QB throws 32 TD with 13 INT he’s not the problem. I mean, if we sign Bradford we are basically hoping for the stats that Stafford just had.

  6. 6 Gian GEAGLE said at 10:18 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Much better chance of Detroit drafting a QB, Detroit signing SAM is unrealistic.
    Wouldn’t be shocked if the Bears also drafted a Qb
    Doubt a QB like SAM who lost half his career would be willing to play for Rex Ryan, lol even the bills defensive playërs don’t like Rex.

  7. 7 Media Mike said at 6:22 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Taylor is signed for next year already.
    You don’t keep Mike Caldwell and the coaching staff for one more year if you’re going to trade Stafford.

  8. 8 Middle Ground - said at 8:31 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    […] Tommy Lawlor Let’s talk about a former #1 overall pick. He was a terrific college QB. He played in a […]

  9. 9 Dave said at 9:21 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Let’s face it, Bradford has banked a lot of coin in his career. I could see him looking just as much into the team dynamics situation, as well as the contract. Here is the teams mentioned most with Sam that are in need of a QB.

    Texans: No doubt about it, to play for BOB would be a good scenario for Sam.

    Eagles: His teammates like him and the offense seems to be QB friendly with quality offensive coaches. I can easily see why he would want to come back.

    Broncos: I’m not sure what to think of Denver. Great city, great team, lots of free agents. Still, I can Sam thinking Denver is a good scenario

    Jets: Defense-minded head coach. I’m not sure about the talent on O and I don’t know if playing for Chan Gailey is high on Sam’s list.

    Browns: I think if they offered the most money, he would still turn it down. The franchise is a mess, ownership is a mess, talent on offense is questionable.

    San Fran: He may or may not want to play for Chip, but there is no debating that the team sorely lacks talent.

    Rams: Not a chance. Once bitten, twice shy.

    Sleeper Pick – Redskins: I could see this scenario if Cousins is looking to break the bank. All things being equal, maybe Gruden would rather pay him rather than Cousins. I would imagine Washington would be a relatively attractive situation for Sam.

    Outside of the Texans, Broncos, and Eagles (and possibly Redskins), I’m just not sure the attractiveness of any other team.

  10. 10 eagleyankfan said at 9:49 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    lots of things have to happen in order for Denver to even consider it…I doubt they’d have any interest in him….

  11. 11 Dave said at 10:16 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    In reality, only one thing has to happen for Denver to consider it, Brock signs somewhere else. Peyton is done and the Broncos don’t have a high draft pick to draft a QB.

  12. 12 Gian GEAGLE said at 10:41 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Doubt skins risk getting screwed and going into free agency with no QB. Id imagine they Tag cousins before the start of free agency. kirk Cousins saved the skins ass from the RG3 debacle. After How much they lost in the RG3(bust) trade, they can’t afford to risk losing Cousins, and go into free agency where they could strike out and be left without a QB
    I don’t believe that the skins can risk not tagging Cousins because it’s no GUARENTEE they can get SAM, Osweiler to sign with them in Free Agency
    Denver has been grooming Osweiler for years, I doubt they are interested in pissing away that continuity with Osweiler to sign Bradford who may be more expensive than Osweiler. Doubt Osweiler wants to leave Denver where he has weapons, knows the system and has a top defense on his side
    Id be pretty surpised if any of the QBs change teams. I expect Fitz to remain with the Jets, Osweiler to remain with Denver, Skins to Tag Cousins, and Eagles retain SAM
    KAPERNICK is also an option for QB needy teams

  13. 13 Dave said at 11:04 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I doubt the Skins feel Cousins is worth $20M per year. He was a 4th round pick for a reason. He beat up on shitty teams this year while playing good against bad teams. Cousins has made $2.5M in his career. He will most likely follow the money.

    Brock threw 22 passes before this year. He came in when Peyton got hurt and was replaced after his 8th game when he played poorly and Peyton was healthy again. Brock has made $3.5M in his career. Again, he will most likely follow the money.

    All things being equal, Kirk, Brock and Sam’s contract demands may very well play a huge role in where then end up. Sam is the only one that has made $70M in his career; therefore, he may be just the pickiest. The other two guys don’t have tens of millions of dollars in the bank. I’m not sure they turn down money to stay with their team, especially guaranteed money.

  14. 14 Ankerstjernen said at 2:48 AM on February 23rd, 2016:

    I really feel like Denver is a sneaky bet here. They are built to win right now with just average QB play, and Sam is the best veteran out there. Of course they want to keep Osweiler, but they might end up having to use the franchise tag on someone else. Osweiler could hit the market and who knows what teams like the Rams or Texans would be willing to offer him. None of those teams seem to want Sam, they are looking to build for the future with a young prospect. But Denver needs someone capeable right now, and they could be back in the big game in another 11 months. Its unlikely, I know. But it would not shock me, if Elway made a bold move here.

  15. 15 Dave said at 12:52 PM on February 23rd, 2016:

    The big question with Denver is that they have 17 unrestricted free agents, 4 restricted free agents, and 5 exclusive restricted free agents. That’s half their roster. Add in Peyton Manning and they are most-likely going to have a huge turnover. They only have about $30M in cap space (assuming Peyton retires) That’s not a lot to resign those guys considering Von Miller is going to get paid big money.

    Elway really mortgaged their future to make a Super Bowl run while Peyton was still a viable QB. Now that he’s done, they will be paying the piper.

  16. 16 Ankerstjernen said at 1:14 PM on February 23rd, 2016:

    Well that’s a good point. They could decide to blow the whole thing up and start over with Osweiler, aiming to be competetive again in a few years. But maybe not. I mean, all of these free agents were already getting paid this year, right. Its not like they will be only 30 mill under the cap if these 17 people all leave. I understand that players who have just won a championship suddenly become more expensive to resign than they were before and they cant keep them all. But they will be keeping the ones they think are most important core players, especially on that defense. And if they do, why wouldnt they try and sustain that succes? If they use the tag on any one of those free agents, Osweiler could wind up somewhere else in a bidding war and they will be forced into the market for a veteran to start right away, since they are not getting anything pro ready with the 32nd pick. I guess we will see what happens. Denver, to me, is the most interesting off season team this year, by far.

  17. 17 Dave said at 1:30 PM on February 23rd, 2016:

    “Its not like they will be only 30 mill under the cap if these 17 people all leave.” Unfortunately, that’s exactly where they stand. They have $30M in cap space to resign all the players I listed + draft picks, that’s assuming Peyton retires. Peyton has a $21.5M cap hit for 2016, which would leave them with $8M in cap space if he does not retire.

    Elway would have to restructure a lot of contracts just to resign all these players.

  18. 18 eagleyankfan said at 10:02 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    wondering if T-Law is trying to convince himself into keeping Bradford…lol
    It’s understood that we need to look at numbers from last year and come to conclusions. Numbers don’t tell the story. Bradford would be in a completely different offense. It’ll be a dumbed down approach. KC’s offense isn’t overly complicated(compared to CK’s). We don’t know how Bradford would do in Pederson’s offense.
    Seems like HR made it clear – the Eagles aren’t breaking the bank for Bradford. Bradford – by his right – might just try and get all the cash he can carry. Which brings up the question — what if the Eagles don’t sign him?
    Maybe Cleveland is eyeing the Jet’s qb…

  19. 19 Dave said at 10:11 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    “KC’s offense isn’t overly complicated (compared to CK’s).” You have this reversed. Chip’s offense was predicated on precision execution of a simplified playbook. The WCO has a well-known reputation as being complex.

  20. 20 eagleyankfan said at 10:55 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    no, I don’t think I have it reversed. Last year, Bradford had to identify the defensive player to account for in the read option. And that’s just the start of the process. It’s understood the WCO has it’s own challenges — but it won’t be as complicated as a CK offense…

  21. 21 Dave said at 11:13 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Google “chip kelly offense too simple”.

    Not to be a smart ass, but have you not followed what has been written about his offense over the past 6 months. This has been a reoccurring theme. Even Malcom Jenkins said it was too simple after his firing.

    Bradford…read option…huh?

  22. 22 eagleyankfan said at 1:06 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    For you and D3 — of course I’ve been following. Even noticed the difference in play calling when Sanchez entered the game ….
    But — as both of you said — they had to dumb it down. Meaning IT WAS OVERLY COMPLICATED for Bradford to begin with…. End of the pre-season — start the season — leading into the 2nd half — Bradford was lost and confused because of how CK ran things. They dumbed it down – which was my point. Bradford was already lost and probably snowballed as the season progressed. Meaning even in a dumbed down offense – he still wasn’t the greatest.
    Enter this year — -do you really think Pederson is coming in here and saying — Let’s sign Bradford because we know he couldn’t handle CK’s complicated offense and give him a more complicated offense? Not a chance. From a QB’s perspective – I still say CK offense is harder on the QB than a WC offense. I don’t think AR’s offense was ever complicated/sophisticated — why would Pedersons?

  23. 23 laeagle said at 2:03 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I don’t know how many times this needs to be said, but Kelly’s offense was simply not “complicated”. It was creative with spread concepts and highly dependent on tempo. Then, in 2015, it was dumbed down. Pederson’s offense will be more complicated, and that is a fact, but it won’t be anything outside of Bradford’s ability to handle.

    You mention “packaged plays” as if that’s evidence of the complexity of Chip’s system. It’s actually evidence of the contrary. The idea of a packaged play is to actually remove factors from the QB’s decision making process. The type of pre-snap reads that most veteran quarterbacks have to be able to handle, along with the ability to audible, is removed an the options are simplified. “If X, then Y. If Y, then Z”. The thought process is removed from the equation because it’s handled pregame in the packaging of the play, prebaked with the options. The whole idea is to remove complexity for the QB.

    There is no evidence whatsoever that Bradford doesn’t have “it” upstairs, and in fact quite a bit of evidence to the contrary. For example, look at the final game, when Bradford was finally able to do normal pre-snap reads and adjust plays accordingly. He did quite well with that, because it’s something he had done for a long time before coming into Chip’s system.

  24. 24 Dave said at 2:34 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    OK, I found the article you were referring too that the offense was simplified. I did remember reading it, I just didn’t take it out of context like you did.


    “Yeah,” Eagles right tackle Lane Johnson told NJ Advance Media, when asked if the offense consists of fewer plays today than at the beginning of the season. “It’s just been about finding what we’re good at and getting better at it and getting rid of what hasn’t been working.”

    Your interpretation of that article as “IT WAS OVERLY COMPLICATED for Bradford” is purely fiction. I have no desire to further debate you on this subject since you’re obviously a troll.

  25. 25 D3FB said at 11:16 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Packaged plays almost completely went away last year.

    It was a watered down version of the WCO.

    And even then packaged plays are very defined reads, in Bradfords case being give the ball or throw a quick pass to a predetermined WR.

    Pederson playbook is going to be larger and more complex than Kellys was. Add in Reich with both Air Coryell and Condon elements and whatever flavors DeFillipo brings and the playbook will be far more robust.

  26. 26 ACViking said at 12:34 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Bradford would be in a completely different offense.
    It’ll be a dumbed down approach.


    Generally lost in the Bradford discussion is that Kelly, by his own admission, dumbed down the Eagles 2015 passing offense at Bradford’s request . . . an offense uncomplicated to start with.

    Kelly never had to dumb-down his offense for Vick.

    Nor for Foles or Sanchez.

    Why did Bradford need Kelly to dumbed-down his 3×5-card offense?

  27. 27 eagleyankfan said at 12:59 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I’ll follow that question with — Didn’t CK go after Bradford because of his intelligence?

  28. 28 bill said at 1:50 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Assuming it was for Bradford, and not 1) his extremely young WR core; 2) his journeyman (at best) guards; or 3) his new to the system workhorse RBs, that’s a good question. I think the real answer is that those three factors, plus Sam’s inability to have a full off-season due to the way his injury was handled, probably all had an impact on Kelly’s offensive playcalling this year. And we can’t rule out the real thrust of the question, that Sam just didn’t have ‘it’ up there. I bet Duce has some insight into that answer, but no one outside of NovaCare is going to get that insight.

  29. 29 Dave said at 2:08 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I think it had much more to do with the receivers than anything.

  30. 30 Dave said at 1:59 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I can’t remember reading anything this season where the passing concepts were too complex for Sam and he requested them to be simplified. Maybe I just missed that. A link would be great, if possible.

    I do remember many instances under both Sanchez and Bradford where passes were thrown and receivers were not expecting them. Algholor, Cooper, Austin and Huff were all involved, multiple times. If the passing concepts were in fact “dumbed down”, was that because the QB didn’t know what was going on, or was that because the receivers were rotating in so much that the QB had little chemistry with the receivers. Remember, Chip was even getting Krause game action right after he was acquired late in the season.

  31. 31 Dave said at 2:37 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    AC, is this what you are referring to about the offense being “dumbed down”, or am I missing something?


  32. 32 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:30 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Why would he have to convince himself? You act like he has any say on the matter. Why does it matter if he is on board or not? What’s the alternative? Stop watching the Eagles If they sign someone you don’t agree with? If only it was that simple for us eagle addicts

  33. 33 eagleyankfan said at 9:00 AM on February 23rd, 2016:

    LOL, no – the article just seemed like Bradford is coming and he’s not sure he likes but if he keeps typing nice things he’ll like the idea. He’s trying to talk himself into like Bradford…

  34. 34 Gian GEAGLE said at 10:15 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Id love a short term deal with SAM, but it’s not neccessary, you can give him a big giant deal that looks lke a ton of money and a ton of years, but odds are Roseman writes the contract so he can get out of the deal after year 2 or 3, even if it’s a “5yr deal”

    I think something that could make sense for both parties is a Kapernick/Dalton type deal, where the Sixers could pay SAM MORE for the right to be able to get out of the deal after every year… The goal for Bradford and the Eagles will be to build around SAM and hopefully hekp him realize his potential, so even if we can get out of his deal after every season, we would be hoping that it doesn’t come to that and SAM goes on to have a geat eagle career… But if he wants security, then we should pay Him a little less.
    25 mil a year was always a JOKE. That figure was NEVER going to be real. Somewhere between 15 and 20mil a year would be great (especially if it’s closer to 15). The difference between paying him 16mil and 20mil just one Demeco Ryan Type player making 3.5-4mil.. Obviously we don’t want to pay SAM more than we have to, but it’s foolish IMO to pay him 16, but lose Him because we aren’t willing to pay him 20, when all it costs us is one Demeco Ryan, Mark Sanchez type veteran that we would have top replace with a cheap rookie contract.. But hopefully the market for SAM won’t be what his camp had hoped, and we get SAM closer to 15mil, which would be awesome..
    Even if we sign Bradford, Id still take Wentz if he fell to #13, but I have zero interest in Goeff, lynch, Cook, Hack, Cardale…. If we can’t have Wentz at 13, Id rather draft Hogan late in the draft instead of spending high picka on the other QBs that don’t appeal to me

  35. 35 Forthebirds said at 11:16 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I agree with signing Bradford at a reasonable price and picking a QB in the first round if one of the top three is available. I am not a draftnik, but from what I have read, Geoff is likely the first off the board with Wentz second and Lynch or Cook third. All of these guys need a year or two before they can start. Hogan in the 3rd rou d also seems like a good way to go.

  36. 36 Gian GEAGLE said at 10:31 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Any chance we can dump Mark Sanchez? Normally it would be a no BRAINER, but when he is the only QB we have under contract, im not sure how realistic it is to expect the Eagles to get Rid of Sanchez having to Sign SAM AND add two more QBs this year?
    Chip kelly hurt us enough, any chance he does us a solid and comes take Sanchez off our hands to have a QB in San Fran that already knows chips offense and his practice structure? It would be great to get San Fran to take his contract off our books. I don’t even care if they give us a 7th round pick in return, swapping our 7th for the Niners 6th is more than enough compensation to clear sanchez cap off our books..
    Im getting antsy to find out if Sanchez will be an eagle or not next year. I really don’t ever want to see Him QB the Eagles again. Id take Jeff Garcia out of retirement over sanchez lol… Id take 67year old Testeverde out of his retirement home instead of Sanchez

  37. 37 eagleyankfan said at 10:59 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I’m with you here – I don’t see the value of Sanchez on this team. Especially if we draft a qb and sign Bradford…

  38. 38 botto said at 1:00 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    why in the wide world of sports would chip help the eagles with anything at all?

  39. 39 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:29 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Chip gets a veteran QB who knows his system and practice style…
    Also chips M.O in philly was to try and get the best 3 QBs he could.. Would you be that shocked if he went into the season with Gabbert,Sanchez and a rookie?… Doubt GAbbert is this great QB you can count on without making him compete for his job…. Chip seemed to be a bigger Sanchez fan than anyone in philly..

  40. 40 BobSmith77 said at 11:01 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Don’t think just about anybody on here thinks Bradford is an awful QB. He isn’t. Just has a very limited upside potential at this point along with a huge injury risk looming over him.

    Say what you will about Smith but he has been very durable while putting up notably better numbers too. If Bradford can stay healthy and on the field for 16 games, maybe he is Smith but he hasn’t been able to even do that in his career with any kind consistency.

    Is Bradford good enough to start in the NFL? Sure.
    Is he even a Top 20 QB? I argue pretty strong no.

    Yeah I guess this team could win 9 games next year if they resign Bradford, retool, and have a notably upgraded defense. Just don’t see this team even winning a 1st round playoff matchup with Bradford.

  41. 41 laeagle said at 11:22 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I would take a look at Smith’s career numbers if I were you. He wasn’t very durable while putting up notably better numbers until later in his career. 9, 16, 7, 0. Those were his starts his first 4 seasons in SF. While he’s not had the same kind of crazy injury history as Bradford, he certainly wasn’t the picture of reliability when he started. I believe Tommy’s comparison still holds.

  42. 42 BobSmith77 said at 2:27 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Smith has been very durable the last 5 years. He got benched in ’12 and lost his job.

  43. 43 laeagle said at 3:03 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Yes, but for the 6 years prior, he was not, and that’s the whole point of the comparison (I listed the number of starts for his first 4 years; in his fifth and sixth year, he started 11 games each year. Not exactly the picture of durability). The comparison still holds. Smith was the exact opposite of “very durable” for his first 5 years.

    Here’s an interesting link from BGN circa 2011. The author did a comparison of starts to determine exactly how injury prone Vick was back then. The results may surprise you. Factoring out games not started due to benching, just dealing with injuries, Smith actually ranked lower than Vick. 57% of possible games started. And note that by that point, he’d been in the league longer than Bradford has to this point.


    Also of interest are Bradford’s number of starts in his first few years: 16, 10, 16, 7, 14. That’s first year to last year. Surprisingly, he’s started more than Smith had through his first 5 years.

    This isn’t to deny that Bradford has, to date, been injury prone. But it does prove, quite conclusively, that Smith was a “injury prone” quarterback in his first 5 years in the league. That doesn’t mean that Bradford will all of a sudden become an iron man, but it does certainly support Tommy’s original point that a QB can be considered a “bust” due to injury and poor performance and later stabilize into a solid player.

  44. 44 Fufina said at 11:56 AM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Have to say Tommy for once i disagree with you.

    “He’s not awful and he’s not one of the best QBs in the league. Being somewhere in the middle is okay.”

    I think being in right slap bang in the middle with a mediocre average QB is the worse place you can be in the NFL. You are good enough to win games, so will not have a shot at elite talent at the top of the draft including QB. Winning 8-10 games and being in the playoff contention every year forces both coaching staff and front office to try and be in win now. You cannot ditch your QB because a young QB will naturally regress compared to your 20th best in the league QB and you will get fired in year 3-4, so you have to keep extending and trying with him.

    This is the place i think the Chiefs and to an extent the Bengals (seriously they might have the deepest and most rounded roster in the NFL) find themselves in. I would feel comfortable betting a lot that the chiefs never win the SB, because while Smith will not loose you games he will struggle to win you one, and at some point in the play offs unless you have a generational defense the QB needs to win you a game.

  45. 45 bsuperfi said at 12:27 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    It’s really hard for me to put QBs into categories like “elite” or even “mediocre,” especially in relation to chances of winning a Super Bowl. There are only a couple QBs in the league who I’d say are clearly “elite,” and we all know who they are. There are a ton of other guys who I think are pretty decent, and some players are capable of getting hot at the right time.

    If I’m graphing this out, I tend to think that there’s a pretty big group below the top couple elite that aren’t too far apart from each other on a line. Some (like Eli) have bigger variance than others. I’m not sure a historic defense is needed to win with many of these guys (though a really good one probably is). It’s just that the defense has to get better and better as the QB gets worse.

    As some others have pointed out, I do think it’s easier to sustain success over the long hall with a great QB. It’s comparatively hard to maintain a great defense over the course of years. So, there’s obviously a lot to be said about having a great QB.

    So what should we do? I’d like to sign Bradford to a reasonable deal because I think he could be what we need if our defense becomes killer under Schwartz. I also want a young QB to groom. I can’t say I know much about college football, but any of the three seem reasonable to me from what I’ve read. But there’s no need to reach if we don’t have Bradford. I just don’t want to waste what could be an ascending defense over the next few years without at least a good QB in the fold.

  46. 46 RC5000 said at 12:47 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Reality is Lurie emphasizes winning. The team has several players in their prime and every year that goes by is wasted if you don’t go for it. Deliberate tanking isn’t reality for the Eagles.What you’re talking about is a full rebuild and whether they stuck with Bradford or Daniel over a QB from this year’s draft say would be to be determined.

  47. 47 eagleyankfan said at 12:57 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Agreed. The NFL breeds mediocrity. Finishing in the middle, drafting in the middle — the expected finish would be in the middle. I’d like Bradford back to see him in a new system for 1 year. Even if you draft a QB – you still need someone this year.
    One of these years Eagles need to stop beating the Giants in meaningless end of the season games.
    It’s not an easy answer because top 5 qb’s don’t fall out of the sky. IF they are drafting a QB this year – they better be doing their homework on him…If not, it’s 2-3 years of him on the bench – followed by 3 more years of being mediocre. What I don’t want to happen is the Eagles draft a QB “because” and let talent(just an example) Laquon fall (again, not saying the Eagles need to take a wr there – just an example).

  48. 48 Tumtum said at 2:03 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    In recent past some pretty mediocre QBs have won it all. Peyton this year. Russle 13′ (really didn’t become elite until halfway through this season). Flacco in 12′. Eli twice….

    If you don’t consider those guys mediocre, they were certainly not within the elite tier of QBs when they won.

  49. 49 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:26 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I think a lot about what determines our perceived Qb rankings is the position they are placed in..

  50. 50 Nailed It! said at 1:15 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Jenkins signs contract extension through 2020! Wow 5 years! Waiting on terms…

  51. 51 ACViking said at 1:27 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Jenkins had a year left on his existing contract.

    In 12/2016 — the final year of his original contract — he turns 29.

    So you figure his new 5-year deal is an extension of his current contract.

    With some bonus money upfront.

    And an easy out after 2018 (Y-2 of new K) — when Jenkins will be 31.

    But also a very manageable figure for 2019-2021 if the Eagles want to keep him.

    We shall see.

  52. 52 A Roy said at 1:15 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Breaking news. Jenkins re-signed 5 years

  53. 53 Nick C said at 1:19 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    who’s reporting it?

  54. 54 Nailed It! said at 1:19 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    The Eagles officially did

  55. 55 Nick C said at 1:20 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Just saw. Thanks lol

  56. 56 johhnyblaze said at 1:28 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Jets release Antonio cromartie,

  57. 57 ACViking said at 1:29 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Turns 32 in April.

    Veteran minimum-type guy now?

    Maybe he heads north to Buffalo.

  58. 58 johhnyblaze said at 2:11 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I could see that, he was a Rex guy initially wasn’t he?

  59. 59 b3nz0z said at 2:40 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    all i know is thank god chip ain’t here to pick that up

  60. 60 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:37 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Kind of surprised when he is coming off a year where he played 15 games for the Jets… Did Dee Milner do Anything for the jets this year?

  61. 61 Tumtum said at 1:53 PM on February 22nd, 2016:


    Interesting read about the McCoy situation. He isn’t an Eagle, but lots of people here are still interested in the guy.

    Its pretty cool that the Police union is so fervently willing to go to bat for 3 of their officers who got into a bar fight. Most people would probably be looking for another job if they got their work involved in their bar fight. I wonder what that same union would be saying if they had actually won the fight? Probably the same thing. Have to love the system!

  62. 62 Julescat said at 2:34 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    there are two possible reasons why he never gets arrested

    1 – the philly DA is incompetent and knows he can’t win the case
    2 – Mc Coy already paid off city officials

  63. 63 Tumtum said at 2:56 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Why are those the only two possible reasons? The only account made public describes a McCoy who misses a punch, and off-duty policemen starting a fight by attempting to steal a bottle of champagne.

    This is now a very public affair. If the police union wants to be so publicly vocal why wouldn’t they dispute the only account the public knows?

  64. 64 Julescat said at 3:29 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    the city threw a girl in jail for 5 to 10 months for misdemeanor assault for yelling at a gay guy during a fight.

    If they wanted McCoy arrested, it would be done and his picture and character assassination would be all over the philly media.

    The fact that McCoy was never charged and the press won’t even mention this assault seems to confirm that the required bribes were paid to make it go away.

  65. 65 b3nz0z said at 3:30 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    if you’re referencing the incident i think you are, she did more than yell and it was less a fight and more a gaybashing by a group of drunks

  66. 66 Julescat said at 3:34 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    the people who did the fighting in the gay man incident got probation.

    the girl was acquitted of battery yet gets time for yelling.

    McCoy’s group put two men in the hospital with serious injuries and weren’t even charged.

    sounds like McCoy’s group was cop bashing by “a group of drunks”

    face it, bribes were paid.

  67. 67 b3nz0z said at 3:47 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    it’s not cop bashing if they aren’t on duty. unless they were running their mouths about being cops of course. while off duty.

  68. 68 BobSmith77 said at 5:19 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    It isn’t and the supposed ‘war on cops’ is almost complete BS. If anything a bunch of states have passed a bunch of additional laws that gives active police officers a number of additional protections when they are being questioned or possibly charged with a crime.

  69. 69 b3nz0z said at 5:41 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    agreed. i’m not anti-cop by any means – they’ve arrested my mugger, they’ve let me slide on minor things, and some have been very nice. i just don’t believe in special priveleges for any citizen in America and i don’t see how citizens can be expected to obey all laws when the enforcers don’t have to.

  70. 70 Media Mike said at 6:32 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I’m not going to let that lie from you go unchecked. That girl punched of one of the victims.

    “but the judge found she threw a punch”


  71. 71 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:35 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Yeah but the police deprtment HASNT shut up about it yet…

  72. 72 Julescat said at 3:40 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    is anybody curious why no media outlets are covering this story?

  73. 73 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:46 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    im not really sure if there is anything to cover at this point. Sounds like a holding pattern… Local sports radio at least had the DA and the head of the FOP on at the end of last week seperately giving both sides a chance to talk.. Both sides sound like are in a Holding Pattern, cops and FOP are frustrated and want him arrested ASAP, DA keeps claiming due dilligence..
    It is disturbing that it’s been weeks and we are still here. If this happened to any of us we would be arrested by the next morning

  74. 74 Tumtum said at 5:04 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Wow.. wonder what kind of jail time McCoy would face. Luckily I am not really knowledgeable of crime charges and their associated penalties.

    Jail time for a bar fight, first offense. Wow.

  75. 75 anon said at 3:07 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    i’m reading that police initiated the bottle stealing, wanted on duty respect, but were off duty.

  76. 76 b3nz0z said at 3:28 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    they deserve whatever happened. we’ve all seen an off duty cop drinking and expecting the same level of obedience they usually get

  77. 77 Julescat said at 3:30 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    yet unconfirmed reports say McCoy threw a sucker punch from behind

  78. 78 b3nz0z said at 3:32 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    i’d put a $20 on it that the “unconfirmed report” was leaked by the police union or one of the officers’ lawyers

  79. 79 Julescat said at 3:37 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    4 people in McCoy’s group versus 2 cops

    something tells me there was a sucker punch from behind thrown.

    McCoy acts like a punk most times so it’s believable he could do this.

  80. 80 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:41 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I don’t care much about the initial fight, but when dudes are on the ground getting STOMPED, that’s a little too much.. I believe when you drop a guy, that’s when the fight ends and you walk away a winner and even that is dangerous, never know if a guy will bang his head open on the ground

  81. 81 Julescat said at 3:43 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    initial stories said bottles were used as weapons too

  82. 82 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:48 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Weapons certainly would make it worse….I don’t know Shadys role, but he sure looked to be beating a man who was on the ground already.

  83. 83 Tumtum said at 5:17 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    In my opinion that is when you just charge all parties involved equally. If the story plays out exactly as the public story portrays. If the Cops started the fight and attempted to steal from Shady’s party, they are charged. If Shady’s posse continued beating on these guys when the fight was clearly over, those guys get charged.

    If Shady only throws one punch… lets say it even connects, at the start of the brawl. He just saw his friend being attacked, so he retaliated and then was pulled away. If that is what actually happened, how do you even charge him with anything?

    Charge the guys who finished the fight and the guys who started it.

  84. 84 b3nz0z said at 3:46 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    oh i have zero respect for mccoy and i wouldn’t be surprised at all if this is all his fault. but in my experiences with the world, off-duty cop plus booze plus fight equals off-duty cop did something he wasn’t sposed to

  85. 85 The original AG said at 7:19 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I think he’s talking about Hollis Thomas’s comments from talking with someone who was there.

  86. 86 Julescat said at 3:41 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    it’s still against the law to hit a guy and put him in the hospital

  87. 87 Tumtum said at 5:09 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    The way things are playing out, it seems more like; it is illegal to win a bar fight… if it happens to be with off-duty cops who don’t identify themselves- the fury of god shall be wrought upon you.

  88. 88 BobSmith77 said at 5:15 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Nope. At this point given how much coverage their has been, they would have filled charges already. I bet there is enough stink here on the Philly PD cops who were off-duty that these supposed indictments that have been supposedly lingering now for 2 weeks won’t ever materialize.

  89. 89 BobSmith77 said at 5:12 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Philly PD union does that for all their ‘rank and file’ members including even the biggest scumbags and outright criminals in their ranks. Part and parcel of how police unions act in large U.S. metropolitan cities.

  90. 90 Ben said at 2:21 AM on February 23rd, 2016:

    I share the same sentiment.
    I have firsthand experience and can tell you without doubt that many of the Police patrolling our streets are power hungry and abusive of their power.
    That’s a fact, not an opinion.

  91. 91 BobSmith77 said at 11:18 AM on February 23rd, 2016:

    My uncle was a Philly homicide cop. This isn’t a rant against police either. I appreciate what they do and understand their are a lot of difficulties & some real dangers that come with it especially working in Philly.

    Just never appreciated the utter code of silence among police about their own or how difficult it is to get adequate justice when they abuse their power/commit crimes.

  92. 92 Media Mike said at 6:26 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Even if the cops started it and also committed assault; it doesn’t mitigate the Shady bunch stomping the one guy when he was on the ground. That is a straight up street thug maneuver and should earn Shady charges in and over itself.

    If a few people get knocked because they start fights and aren’t good it them; so be it.

    But a 4 on 1 ground stomping is never justifiable.

  93. 93 anon said at 6:54 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    isn’t that the point of shady’s bouncers?

  94. 94 Tumtum said at 7:57 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Charge everyone then. How can you not?

  95. 95 Media Mike said at 7:59 PM on February 22nd, 2016:


  96. 96 Nick C said at 2:03 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    We should have about 27-28M in cap space after the Jenkins extension. Initial thoughts: Good to clear room, 5 years seemed like a while for someone about the be 29 (but 5 years is more like 3 years in the NFL so we will probably be alright). Good move, waiting for the contract figures for assurance 🙂

  97. 97 RC5000 said at 2:42 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Where are you getting 27-28 million from?

  98. 98 Nick C said at 2:50 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Currently have close to 26M, per OTC. His extension is expected to lower his cap hit this year by 1-2M.

  99. 99 RC5000 said at 3:05 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Whoa I thought cap was projected much lower than what they have: $162,280,362

    It changed again? I thought 154 was the last estimate.

  100. 100 FairOaks said at 3:11 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    They are probably including the 9.5 or so rollover the Eagles have available.

    But I thought I’ve read the base cap might go to 157.

  101. 101 Nick C said at 3:13 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    It is projected to be at least 155M + the Eagles 7.2M rollover from last year

  102. 102 RC5000 said at 3:22 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    They have Total Cap Number: $140,887,600 (Top 51: $136,282,322) though.

  103. 103 Nick C said at 3:31 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Our active cap spending is 132M+ 4.2M in dead money=136.2M
    Projected cap= 162.2M
    Ergo, around 26M in current cap space without the Jenkins extension. I was assuming that with the extension we would gain 1-2M in cap space as must extensions prorate the initial signing bonus. We have the wait to see the final breakdown of figures though.

  104. 104 RC5000 said at 3:53 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Yeah but they really have $21,392,312 to spend + whatever Jenkins number gets reduced by (+ anything else they might do), right ? I don’t care what they could theoretically spend now if they have to shed 4.6 million by opening day or whatever to be in compliance when season starts.

  105. 105 BobSmith77 said at 2:36 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Meh on the Jenkins extension but I understand why they extended him for a few reasons. Sure Roseman structured it so it isn’t that painful to get out of after Y3 either.

  106. 106 b3nz0z said at 2:40 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    meh? that’s surprising i thought of this as a pretty great move. you think he’s gonna decline?

  107. 107 since1961 said at 2:58 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    You don’t know BS77. Meh is a rave, from him

  108. 108 b3nz0z said at 3:07 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    haha so he’s an eagles fan

  109. 109 BobSmith77 said at 4:49 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    More accurate. He’s a solid starter but the Eagles’ press announcement said he is a ‘long-term piece to build around.’

    Think not especially with his age (29) this year and status (entering his 9th year next year).

    He’s a solid vet that they know now they have locked up at that spot for 2-3 years vs just next year.

  110. 110 BobSmith77 said at 4:59 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Numbers last year were better than I thought.

  111. 111 Nailed It! said at 2:40 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Explain to me why you are down on the move? Cause I think it is a good move and allowing our first +safety since Dawkins to leave would be the opposite of good, therefore bad.

  112. 112 A_T_G said at 2:47 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Really? I was very p,eased to see it. Stability at an unstable position without any painful expense and a great guy to boot. What is there not to like?

  113. 113 Mitchell said at 3:07 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Overt pessimism is hard to understand.

  114. 114 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:24 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    The philadelphia way…

  115. 115 Mac said at 4:04 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Agree 100%. Safety is one of the most complicated positions on the football field. Having a better than just solid veteran presence is well worth the contract Jenkins just signed.

    Also, it continues the message that’s being sent to Bradford/Condon that we ARE signing players that matter for the right price.

  116. 116 BobSmith77 said at 4:47 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Brings a bit of stability over the intermediate term. Just not a huge Jenkins guy (stone hands, struggles in coverage). He’s solid but given his age/skill set just in the category of ‘decent starter.’

    On the positive side, he’s been durable, is one of the leaders on this team apparently, and doesn’t have any outstanding glaring weaknesses.

  117. 117 anon said at 4:48 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    he was our beat cb at times

  118. 118 ACViking said at 4:50 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    And best LB, too.

  119. 119 BobSmith77 said at 4:51 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Nah. As poorly as Maxwell started out last year and as Carroll/Rowe played at times putting Jenkins in the slot vs a WR is asking for a mismatch most times. Ditto a burner deep over the top in a Cover 2 scheme.

  120. 120 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:15 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    A little better than “solid”

  121. 121 MS said at 6:38 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Man you are crazy. Stone hands.. Ha. He’s had a bunch of picks for us. Sure he did drop a few. But if you put it like you did, a) you never liked any safety, and b) that’s like busting a baseball hitter for saying “that loser, some of his triples could have been hrs…” so misguided.

  122. 122 Mac said at 7:01 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    This highlights the #1 reason why I would have fired Chip Kelly. His lack of ability to identify the simplest solution to the teams worst problem… have the equipment boy put stickum on WR and DB gloves. As Belicheat has proven repeatedly, cheating works and is ok in the NFL.

  123. 123 Tumtum said at 3:07 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Interesting for sure. I like the guy and am happy to have him. Just curious why it happens now. He was signed for another year and it looks like it should be taking cap dollars away now. Cox isn’t signed yet, unless I completely missed that in February football mode. The starting QB for this year is presumable not on the roster.

    Over all, love the guy and am glad he is locked up for the rest of his effective career.

  124. 124 b3nz0z said at 3:08 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    thought it increased cap

  125. 125 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:23 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I have a hard time believing that… We had to get sonething out of giving him this deal Now

  126. 126 b3nz0z said at 3:27 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    i might be using the wrong words – it increases the amount of cap we have available this year, or at least i thought that’s what i read

  127. 127 FairOaks said at 3:14 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    It replaced this last year with a five-year deal. Those have a tendency to reduce the current year cap hit, since you can have a higher signing bonus which gets prorated rather than a lot of salary in year one.

    Signing him now (when the Eagles have more leverage) reduces the need to sign him next offseason, at probably a bit lower price. One less headache next year and a player to plan around.

  128. 128 Tumtum said at 5:06 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Makes sense then. I thought I would probably get a reply like that. Wasn’t sure though. Would of preferred something along the lines of “Cox was signed two weeks ago, you live under a rock?”.

  129. 129 Bullwinkle said at 2:57 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Maybe Bradford is a little like Jim Plunkett who was a Heisman Trophy winner and number 1 overall pick. Plunkett played for some bad teams and had injury problems. He was thought to be a complete bust. He eventually led the Raiders to 2 Super Bowl wins, one of which was over the Eagles.

  130. 130 b3nz0z said at 3:07 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    thanks i wasn’t thinking about that SB loss

  131. 131 botto said at 4:33 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I always think about it

  132. 132 ACViking said at 4:37 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Remember the Raiders’ 1st TD — the 80 yard TD pass on a scramble from Plunkett to RB Kenny King.

    The pass was about an inch or so over the out-stretched arm of RCB Herm Edwards.

    If Vermeil had the HWS req’ts of Kelly for his CBs, that pass gets broken up.

    And the Eagles win the SB.

  133. 133 The original AG said at 7:16 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    So what you’re saying is Herm Edwards cost us a superbowl. I’m readying my pitchforks and torches for the next time he comes to town.

  134. 134 Media Mike said at 6:24 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    And 100% proves the point that 2 Super Bowl victories don’t get you into the HOF.

    F YOU ELI!

  135. 135 mksp said at 3:00 PM on February 22nd, 2016:


  136. 136 mksp said at 3:07 PM on February 22nd, 2016:


  137. 137 anon said at 3:15 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    #Eagles S Malcolm Jenkins signed a 4-year extension worth $35M, source said. $21M in guarantees. Was to make $5.5M this year, now makes $10M— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) February 22, 2016

  138. 138 FairOaks said at 3:22 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I assume a lot of that $10 million is a signing bonus, which would get prorated. His original salary this year was $5 million, so if the bonus is any higher than $6 million then the cap hit this year is reduced. Unless it really is just an extension (which earlier reports said it was not), and the old $5 million was kept, in which case it would be higher hit this year.

  139. 139 Nick C said at 3:24 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Waiting for the actual breakdown. I originally thought this would increase our cap space 1-2M, but with these figures I am doubting it.

  140. 140 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:22 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Oh happy Day!!! Now we can sign ILLOKA without offending Jenkins..
    Any idea how this extension effects the Cap?

  141. 141 b3nz0z said at 3:31 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Eagles create $1.5M of 2016 salary cap room with Malcom Jenkins’ 4-year, $35M extension. 2016 cap number goes from $7,166,668 to $5,666,668.

  142. 142 Nick C said at 3:33 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    So we currently have around 27.5M in space.

  143. 143 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:34 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Could be like 34 if we dump Mufasa and Sanchez

  144. 144 Nick C said at 3:36 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Yup. I do not know what the hold up is on DeMeco. I understand waiting for Sanchez because we won’t have a QB, but I think we should do the decent thing and let Demeco try and catch on with another team as early as possible. I’m not for another restructure, we kept Celek around for the leadership role.

  145. 145 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:39 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Strongly agree!!! . If we are moving on from Mufasa, it better happen before March 1st treating that man with the respect he deserves . I don’t care if cap wise it makes sense to cut him June 1st or whenever, if he isn’t going to be an eagle next year, have some respect and cut him before March 1..

  146. 146 Nick C said at 3:46 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Ryans only has 1m in dead $. post June cuts are designed to spread the dead money over two years. If anything it made sense to do that with Cooper. Kinda makes me nervous that we will be keeping him. Or they could be waiting to see if Sam resigns. No need to cut him if we are going the cheapo QB route.

  147. 147 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:50 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I didn’t look at the contract, just speaking generally… But thanks for the info, I guess that means if Mufasa isn’t going to be an eagle next year, we should find out before March 1st, which is WHATS best for everyone involved

  148. 148 FairOaks said at 3:48 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I doubt they restructure DeMeco again (they just did last year), but they could well decide to keep him this year. We don’t have a ton of money tied up at the LB position and our depth there is not good. It would only be if we really need the cap room elsewhere, such as Bradford or another free agent.

  149. 149 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:33 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Makes sense

  150. 150 nevadausa16 said at 3:36 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    where are you getting these numbers?

    just asking because the extensions for LJ and Ertz increased their cap charge, since the prorated portion of the signing bonus paid on signing the extension was added to their 2015 salary.

    if your numbers are right, then MJ didn’t get an extension. he did a renegotiation.

  151. 151 Nick C said at 3:37 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    LJ and Ertz were on rookie contracts.

  152. 152 nevadausa16 said at 3:39 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    yes. i understand that part.
    just wondering if MJ’s deal is not an extension, but a renegotiation. that’s the only way to cut cap charge

  153. 153 Nick C said at 3:42 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    A lot of times when players are extended over 4-5 years, that prorated signing bonus is able to stretch out, and their base salary is lowered for that first year. It is similar to when someone restructures but creates more guaranteed money in the future. (Like the Cowboys do with Romo every year)

  154. 154 nevadausa16 said at 3:43 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Joel Corry’s breaking it down.

  155. 155 FairOaks said at 3:53 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Correct. The reports earlier was that the “extension” replaced the last year of the older deal.

    By Corry’s numbers, that means, I think, a $7.5 million signing bonus, and a $2.5 million salary this year (so a $4 million cap hit, down from 5.5, plus the remaining proration from the earlier deal). A $6 million salary next year, fully guaranteed, and salary goes up after that (but non-guaranteed, and probably a roster bonus in 2018).

  156. 156 nevadausa16 said at 3:59 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    excellent work. thanks

  157. 157 b3nz0z said at 3:44 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Joel Correy’s twitter; about halfway down this page under “other reactions” http://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2016/2/22/11094534/philadelphia-eagles-malcolm-jenkins-contract-extension-reaction-players-safety

  158. 158 Joe Minx said at 3:39 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Jenkins is one of those dudes that it feels like he was an Eagle even before he actually was. Glad he’ll be here a while longer.

  159. 159 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:40 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    New Jersey boy

  160. 160 nevadausa16 said at 3:50 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    he’s from East Orange. Giants territory?
    but North Jersey’s an Ohio State feeding ground.

  161. 161 BobSmith77 said at 4:53 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    that’s jets/giants territory with few eagles’ fans. I say once you are near trenton or above morristown on 287 you are throughly in NY football territory.

  162. 162 Eagle Talon said at 6:59 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    In that area it all depends on who is winning. After Chips first year, there probably were a lot of Eagle fans, now the same fans are on the ODB train.

  163. 163 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:01 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Sounds like the cowboys still have,issues with Romos collarbone, they are deciding if the wanna put a plate on his collarbone to stabilize it or shave the bone down… He either broke his collarbone like 3 or 4 times already, has an ugly history of back issues and is 36 years old… God I want to see them not draft a QB..
    Cowboys drafted less QBs than any franchise since they took Aikman #1′

  164. 164 RC5000 said at 4:11 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Haven’t you said it’s a bad QB draft before or was it someone else?

  165. 165 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:53 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Yeah I’m not a fan of any of them… But I’d feel better about needing a QB if I had a top 5 pick, the best two QBs in any class are at least worth investigating. Assuming we can solve a franchise QB at #13 of a week class scares me
    IF dallas doesn’t hit on a QB in the draft, I don’t see how they can keep from last season repeating itself. Ultimately I don’t know if any of these kids can play or not, but if the Cowboys DONT draft one, they can’t hit on one, and I don’t see a solution for them in FA

  166. 166 FairOaks said at 4:24 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I hope they draft their very own Christian Ponder type

  167. 167 ACViking said at 4:32 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    That would be their own Craig Morton II . . .

    The original CM (a 1st Rd pick) lost his starting job to a 10th Rd pick.

  168. 168 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:05 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Spending a draft pick on a QB that busts is even better. I like your style..

  169. 169 Nick C said at 4:14 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Malcolm Jenkins: “I think everyone in the building wants Sam back.”

  170. 170 ACViking said at 4:29 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    What’s a player supposed to say when a reporter asks him if he thinks the team should re-sign Bradford?

    Anything short of “yes” — like “that’s management’s call” — is a slap in the QB’s face (unless you’re talking about 2014 Cards QB Ryan Lindley).

    Isn’t that the safe answer? To say, in essence, “yes . . . we all do”?

    Last off-season, Jordan Matthews said Foles was the QB of the future.

    Roseman’s made an offer to Tom Condon — if not formally then certainly ball-park numbers were put out there. Roseman’s made that much clear in his last interview.

    And Roseman’s made equally clear that Bradford and Condon are the guys who’re saying “no.”

    The Eagles have a range in mind at the moment. It’s not what Bradford wants . . . at the moment.

    If Bradford reaches free agency, do you think the Eagles will sit on their hands waiting for the chance to match the best offer?

    Or will the Eagles move in a different direction . . . leaving Bradford to his own devices?

  171. 171 Nick C said at 4:37 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I agree there is a lot of posturing involved from management, players, agents, etc. I was just pointing out that Malcolm clearly believes in Sam by his comments. He could have just gave the usual, “yeah, we want him back.” but he went on the say that everyone in the entire building wants him back, and he believes they can win with him. In a time where there is little to talk about, I believe this is relevant.

    Do I think Sam’s agent is trying to squeeze every last penny out of a potential contract? Yeah, but he is an agent, and that is his MO. We probably cannot blame Sam though if he isn’t willing to give us a great discount. He was here for one year. His coach and system are gone for someone not so exciting (Pederson). Don’t get me wrong, I like some of the coaching decisions. The only thing that does bother me is that Sam signed the richest rookie contract before the wages were controlled, made 70+M and now wants 20+M/year when he has never even sniffed the playoffs. But he will probably get it in such a QB-needy league. So bottom line: I cannot answer your question. I do believe they should have transition tagged him though so we could at least not bid against ourselves.

  172. 172 ACViking said at 4:48 PM on February 22nd, 2016:


    Agree about Condon. Which reflects Bradford’s own desires.

    And agree on Bradford. It’s a business. And he’s treating that way.

    Back to Jenkins’s comment . . . the only way to know for sure — or at least better — what Jenkins really thinks is how he answered the same questions about Foles after last season.

    I don’t think he’s on record. So all we can do is take him at face value — depending on the context of the questions, his demeanor, etc.

    Would have been interesting if, after Jenkins gave that answer, he was asked if Bradford’s as good now right now as Drew Brees was in 2009-13.

    Jenkins is all class. Doesn’t treat the media or fans disrespectfully (the way one of his former HCs did).

    He’d be a helluva coach himself. By that, I mean teacher.

  173. 173 FairOaks said at 4:40 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    “Everyone in the building wants him back” is a different response than “I’d love to have him back”. That does go a bit above and beyond the necessary response.

    If the Eagles won’t offer full market value right now, I’m sure Bradford wants to wait until free agency — he’s this close to it — to see what kind of other offers he gets, from what situations. Yes, it’s possible that the Eagles could go another direction, but given the FA possibilities out there, it seems unlikely. Tommy mentioned there might not be tons of options for Bradford, but there are even fewer for the Eagles, at least before the draft. So Bradford can afford to wait for a while (though he would seem the type to more likely get signed early in free agency).

  174. 174 ACViking said at 4:53 PM on February 22nd, 2016:


    Helluva game of 5-card stud going on between Roseman and Condon.

    Which one’s Edward G. Robinson’s character and which one’s Steve McQueen’s character from The Cincinnati Kid?

  175. 175 P_P_K said at 6:32 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    That movie birthed my love of five card stud.

  176. 176 A Roy said at 9:15 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I’d say Condon is more like Paul Newman in Cool Hand Luke. Bluffing with nothing.

  177. 177 MagSaysWHAAT? said at 9:38 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    He apparently did it with Hank Stramm for his own contract, once upon a time. Although there was that pesky AFL dangling dollars in front of good NFL players to keep upping the ante.

  178. 178 ChoTime said at 11:08 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Except Condon does have something to lose!

  179. 179 BobSmith77 said at 5:09 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Its a throwaway quote from a guy who is now perceived to be a team leader & the media readily goes to get the player reactions’ on various issues.

    Largely just Jenkins saying the smart/experienced veteran thing you would expect him to say.

  180. 180 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:42 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    laquan Treadwell ISNT running at the combine? Sooooo whack!
    You know it’s an average QB draft class when they are all throwing at the combine lol.

  181. 181 RC5000 said at 4:54 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    So why are you so worried about Dallas taking a QB and passing up a player at another position?

  182. 182 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:00 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Im SOOO worried about NOTHING that has to do with Dallas but thanks for asking

  183. 183 botto said at 8:22 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I don’t think dallas is worried about the eagles either.

  184. 184 Media Mike said at 6:22 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I’m worried about that because I really would like to get either Goff or Wentz at 13.

  185. 185 RC5000 said at 8:43 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Sure. You like the QBs. Gian Geagle doesn’t like the QBs but is scared Dallas is going to take one which makes no sense.

  186. 186 Media Mike said at 6:21 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    “I’ve heard Hue Jackson in Cleveland has his eyes on another veteran QB.”

    You heard this from me. Repeatedly. Haslem is going to compel Hue to coach up RG3.

    BOOK IT!

  187. 187 Mac said at 6:59 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Haslem = Nosferatu

  188. 188 ACViking said at 7:06 PM on February 22nd, 2016:


  189. 189 MagSaysWHAAT? said at 9:33 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Even in the ’20s and ’30s there were some scary special effects! After all, people in the entertainment industry still talk about Orson Welles ‘War of the Worlds’ and it was on the radio! Perhaps folks were more innocent, or gullible, or maybe not. You can still fool some of the people some of the time. ;~)

  190. 190 Iskar36 said at 10:52 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    I’m a huge fan of podcasts, and there is a fantastic Radiolab podcast on the War of The Worlds broadcast.


    Interestingly, the original broadcast wasn’t the only time that broadcast got people concerned it was real. The podcast is worth a listen if you enjoy that kind of thing.

  191. 191 ICDogg said at 11:02 PM on February 22nd, 2016:


  192. 192 Gian GEAGLE said at 6:22 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Sounds like Malcom doesn’t miss chip too much… Spoke about how the changes away from chips style to a pro style should benefit us…everything from time of possession, offense and defense complimenting each other to the change in Practice style, specifically Its pretty absurd that Chip DIDNT have the defense meeting together at all, where as in the pros there are meetings for Defense as a whole, since football requires gelling between the DL with the LBs and the LBs with the DBs… Every team has individual group meetings but it’s kind of crazy that chip DIDNT have the defense meeting together at all…. Not surprised, the entire team was Fractured by the end of the season… Apparently there is more to cultire than guys who don’t get arrested

  193. 193 ACViking said at 7:05 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    With one caveat . . .

    Jenkins did say he prefers playing in a 3-4 defense.

  194. 194 Anders said at 3:09 AM on February 23rd, 2016:

    He should say 2 gap system, because not like Wade Phillips 3-4 is any different than Schwartz 4-3 in terms of more stress on the safeties

  195. 195 daveH said at 7:34 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Last sentance winner.

  196. 196 Media Mike said at 7:24 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Also funny that we’re talking Alex Smith = Sam Bradford because I’ve been harping on the fact that I’d like to work off of a 2016 cap version of the Smith deal for Bradford.


  197. 197 GENETiC-FREAK said at 7:39 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Mathis speaking on Chip http://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2016/2/22/11095902/evan-mathis-chip-kelly-eagles-release-comments-trade-broncos-super-bowl-50-guard-49ers

  198. 198 P_P_K said at 8:23 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Great interview with Mathis from a Colorado source. http://www.9news.com/sports/evan-mathis-writes-about-impending-surgery-chip-kelly-how-less-was-more-in-year-with-broncos/51017282

    Here’s what he had to say about Chip: “There were many things that Chip had done that showed me he wasn’t building a championship team,” Mathis wrote in his e-mail to 9NEWS. “Two of the main issues that concerned me were: 1. A never-evolving, vanilla offense that forced our own defense to play higher than normal play counts. 2. His impatience with certain personality types even when they were blue-chip talents. The Broncos team I was on would have eaten Chip alive. I don’t think he could have handled the plethora of large personalities.”

  199. 199 MagSaysWHAAT? said at 9:29 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Sounds like all the other teams that didn’t want him, or the double-benching at half-salary in Denver, have made Evan a little bitter?

  200. 200 Insomniac said at 10:02 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    No sounds like you’re the only one bitter by constantly defending Chip Kelly after multiple players seeming to have similar opinions.

  201. 201 ChoTime said at 11:07 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    At least she’s consistent… very consistent.

  202. 202 CrackSammich said at 9:40 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    “Instead of conversating. ”


    They didn’t even do that ironically.

  203. 203 ICDogg said at 10:48 PM on February 22nd, 2016:

    Well. Deez.

  204. 204 Pennguino said at 12:18 AM on February 23rd, 2016:

    They have to franchise Bradford. They don’t have the ammo to move up if they target a certain QB. None of these QB’s are sure things. The reason for the franchise is due to timing of NFL events. Tender so that Bradford’s camp can still negotiate with other teams.

    Let them know we want him here in Philly. We feel we can go deep in the playoffs with him as our QB. We understand we might not be able to come to a price that fits us both. We understand he may not want to be here so we left open the opportunity for him to negotiate with other teams.

    Non Exclusive Tag:
    Allows Bradford to work out a deal with any team he wants
    Allows us to not completely compete against other teams on cost for Sam
    Most of the power stays with the Eagles
    Keeps our Free Agency options open to sign a couple players (Oline)
    Draft smoke screen-We won’t need a QB so teams like STL, NYJ, HOU won’t jump ahead of us.
    Depending on FA it will put more pressure on us taking an OT

    If he signs it then we have the option of trading him during the draft. Let’s say the QB that Pederson wants is there at 13 and they pull the trigger. The three teams I mentioned may pull the trigger during their pick to acquire Bradford.

    If they can’t work out a deal then he plays for one year. If they grab a guy at 13 they can either pull the contract if he hasn’t signed it yet or try and trade him if they don’t want him as the bridge.

    If they keep him then their remaining cap plus a June 1st Peters cut breaks them even. Meco, Sanchez, Sproles are all June 1st cuts to clear 10.5 Mil from the cap to sign the rookies and get back under the cap based on what was spent for FA or Cox’s extension.

  205. 205 Call Me Carlos the Dwarf said at 1:32 PM on February 23rd, 2016:

    Smith was 27 when he had that season. Bradford will be 29.

    But yeah, I can’t imagine someone objecting to keeping Bradford as long as it’s under $15m a year.