Eagles outspent Skins by 14m from 01-04

[OWUeagleMD]

double post

[OWUeagleMD]

No you idiot. I'm saying that the Redskins org. is far more superior than the philty eagles have ever been or ever will be. You had the last 5 years to accomplish something great and every year your team blew it. That means you have as many Super bowl trophies as Arizona and Detroit That's ZERO. Get it now, Einstien?

:eaglesuck :eaglesuck :eaglesuck :eaglesuck :eaglesuck :eaglesuck :eaglesuck :eaglesuck

You repeated your previous argument verbatum without adding any new thoughts to the equation. You ignored my argument entirely, choosing instead to call me an idiot, and ironically, misspell "Einstein."

What is your basis for saying the Eagles are inferior to the Redskins in every way? If it is Super Bowl trophies, as I suspect it is, than you have no choice but to admit that the Dallas Cowboys are likewise superior to your Washington Redskins.

I don't think that's the case, but extending your logic, it would seem that you do.

The Eagles most definately blew 5 SB chances in a row. I don't remember disputing this.

[TODD]

I can't believe I just read 6 pages of this, but since I did, I feel compelled to ask...

Do you guys even know what you're arguing about?

[OWUeagleMD]

Yes, he did. At the time it looked like Rock was going to start a lot of games.

You are replete with conjecture, but short on facts.

This conundrum where the Eagles aren't cheap because they don't pay their players is starting to get to you guys.

I have accepted long ago that Lurie isn't going to spend as much money as Snyder. I may not be excited about it, but I've long known it to be fact.

That doesn't mean Lurie is cheap What gets to me is the argument that Lurie spends less than Snyder, and thus, is the cheapest owner in the league.

Donovan McNabb recieved a 20 mil signing bonus.

Jevon Kearse, when signed, received a record contract for a DE.

We've re-signed more players to new contracts during their rookie contracts than any team in the league.

These aren't legitimate characteristics of a cheap owner.

It's a bunk claim, simple as that.

[OWUeagleMD]

I can't believe I just read 6 pages of this, but since I did, I feel compelled to ask...

Do you guys even know what you're arguing about?

Sweet Sig.

[tr1]

I have accepted long ago that Lurie isn't going to spend as much money as Snyder. I may not be excited about it, but I've long known it to be fact.

That doesn't mean Lurie is cheap What gets to me is the argument that Lurie spends less than Snyder, and thus, is the cheapest owner in the league.

Donovan McNabb recieved a 20 mil signing bonus.

Jevon Kearse, when signed, received a record contract for a DE.

We've re-signed more players to new contracts during their rookie contracts than any team in the league.

These aren't legitimate characteristics of a cheap owner.

It's a bunk claim, simple as that.

Ok, I'll buy-in that the Eagles aren't cheap IF I never read again that Redskins over-spend...deal?

[Westbrook36]

Ok, I'll buy-in that the Eagles aren't cheap IF I never read again that Redskins over-spend...deal?

Deal.

[Pocono]

This really is becoming unbelievable...

So, the Eagles don't use LTBE to create cap, therefore, they create cap by not spending allocated funds on players...but they aren't cheap? This allocated money, somehow, mysteriously doesn't end up in players' pockets...

The point I've been trying to make all along is that by NOT spending money allocated for players' salaries, the Eagles, and those other 'cap genius' teams, have undermined the intent of the CBA and thereby, caused these labor problems.

We can debate the word 'cheap', but you can never dispute my previous paragraph.

Suck it up fellas, admit that the Eagles don't pay players what they could...the players know it.

Oh, and can Pocono provide a link for the low number he cites?

I don't think you understand the concept. If a team wanted to pocket some of the cap allowance instead of paying players with it they would pocket some of the cap instead of paying players with it. There's a cap ceiling and a cap floor and in 05 the floor was about 11M less than the ceiling. The reason teams do the LTBE'd gambit is so cap space won't go unused and lost and instead is forwarded to the next year so they can put it in player's pockets and exceed the cap in the following year. Is it that hard to understand? TR1 suppose you go to K Mart with $50 bucks in your pocket. You spend $30 but don't want to spend the other $20. Would you just not spend the other $20 or would you buy something for $20 and expect to get your money back by returning it the next time? If the owners wanted to keep the money wouldn't it be better to not spend the money.

As for that ridiculous paragraph that can't be debated about the Eagles causing labor problems by passing unused amount forward you've got to be kidding unless you didn't understand that teams can spend well below the cap if they wish. The NFLPA would much rather have money which teams save for injury replacement or mid-season extensions passed forward and spent the following year than have it go unused and go down the drain. That's what happens if the LTBE'd trick isn't used and that's why all teams[including the Skins] use it now to forward cap space or to offset ULTBE'd incentives that are earned. If the Skins hadn't put that unused space in Cartwright's contract it would have been lost and they would have started 06 with a cap lower than the league limit because of other incentives that were earned.

It's bizarre to me that you think you're defending your owner's cap policy by saying he doesn't save cap space from being wasted by doing the LTBE'd trick but instead put's 1M incentives into a bit player's contract who is playing on a tender offer just to be a nice guy. With friends like you Snyder doesn't need enemies.

[Westbrook36]

Pocono, I'm just content at this point to just drop it. I made this thread not to say Lurie is more generous that Snyder....just to show people who say the Eagles are cheap how ridiculous that statement is.

90 percent of the people who say the Eagles are cheap because of LBTEs don't even understand how they work. You made a great point. If Lurie was going to be cheap, why not just spend to the minimum and pocket the money.

By inserting the LBTE, they are transferring the money to spend in the future. Anyone who says they don't spend it in the future is mistaken. If Lurie was cheap, why not just take the 6.5 million inserted in Jack Brewer's contract and keep it?

If Lurie's cheapness is so transparent, then why create this allusion of spending when it would be obvious to all players and agents, not just super smart messageboard posters who can see through such obvious ploys, right?

[BigDFan5]

The Eagles were on top for a few years...currently we are. What happens next year remains to be seen.

umm currently the giants are

[BigDFan5]

disregard........

[tr1]

If Lurie's cheapness is so transparent, then why create this allusion of spending when it would be obvious to all players and agents, not just super smart messageboard posters who can see through such obvious ploys, right?

Well, so much for the deal, eh? I can't let this go by.

Why does Lurie 'create this allusion (sic) of spending...'? Well, you are right, it is an illusion and yes, the players and their agents have seen through it.

Look, don't take my word for it, ask Gene Upshaw. By doing what the Eagles have done (i.e., not spent allocated funds on players' salaries), they have been, in large part, responsible for union unrest...that's a fact.

.

[tr1]

If a team wanted to pocket some of the cap allowance instead of paying players with it they would pocket some of the cap instead of paying players with it.

Since you weren't willing to let sleeping dogs lie, let me respond.

This is an excellent question you pose. You say Lurie could take a short cut, not use LTBE, and pocket the money...but he doesn't...why? So that he can create the illusion that he spends large amounts on players salaries, when in fact he doesn't...instead, he builds credits on his cap.

Now, if Lurie SPENT any of that cap, say for instance, to re-negotiate with TO and re-sign WB at the SAME TIME, one might not be tempted to think that he, in fact, is being cheap. He could have paid everyone a ton of money last year - something a non-greedy owner would do - to celebrate a SB year. He could have gone out and gotten top-notched backup players, to spare you Eagle fans from a dismal season...But no, Mr. Lurie decided to stand hard and fast against TO, and jerk WB around until close to the end of the season, and not care about backup playes.

Now, they'll jerk Runyan around a bit...I suppose this is how they find self-worth, by jerking players around...

Is Lurie cheap by not spending his allocated cap and making sure it gets into his players' pockets? Ask the NFLPA, TO, Simon, Burgess, etc....

I was willing to let this drop earlier, but no more. Lurie is about Lurie...he doesn't really care about his players...otherwise, he'd pay them all that he could.

[Pocono]

Well, so much for the deal, eh? I can't let this go by.

Why does Lurie 'create this allusion (sic) of spending...'? Well, you are right, it is an illusion and yes, the players and their agents have seen through it.

Look, don't take my word for it, ask Gene Upshaw. By doing what the Eagles have done (i.e., not spent allocated funds on players' salaries), they have been, in part, for union unrest...that's a fact.

That's idiocy.

In 01 the Eagles passed 2M forward starting 02 with an adjusted cap 2M higher than the league limit. In 02 they passed about 3.5M forward which means their actual spending in 02 was 1.5M under the league limit and that plus the overage from 01 was passed forwardto 03. In 04 another 1.5M was added to the carry over meaning again their actual outlay in 03 was 1.5M less than the limit. In 04 they signed Kearse and Owens and the amount that was carried over was 1.3M which means in 04 they spent 3.2M OVER the league limit. They saved the cap space for when they had opportunity to add what they believed were impact players and they spent above the league limit. If they wished they could have pocketed that 2M in 01 and the 1.5M in 02 and 03 and no one would say boo[and in Phila everyone says boo] but instead they used this gimmick to move extra space forward so they could spend above the cap when they saw opportunity.

In 05 they released fat Corey at the end of August and picked up other cap space when TO was suspended. There's no one to spend it on that late so they saved it via Mr Brewer and will start 06[if 06 ever starts] about 7M over the announced limit and spend that cap space when the whole FA field is available instead of not writing those clauses and putting that 6.9M into their pockets. Upshaw may not be the sharpest tool in the shed but thank God he knows the difference between cap space saved so it can be spent later and cap space lost forever.

This is from memory so if you want a link perhaps you can provide one when you next cry about the amounts the Eagles pass forward which you claim are the cause of labor unrest. Passing forward amounts from year-to year and spending them eventually doesn't sound so bad when you realize they have the option under the CBA to simply pocket those amounts if they wish. The illusion of spending is done so the money can be passed forward instead of lost. It's the only way it can happen under the CBA.

[tr1]

So, why not spend that 'savings' at the beginning of free agency...like this year for instance. Or last year when TO and WB were there to sign?

Let's see how much Lurie has in cap space come August 1st. Then tell me 'there wasn't anyone good available to spend the cap on.'

[Pocono]

So, why not spend that 'savings' at the beginning of free agency...like this year for instance. Or last year when TO and WB were there to sign?

Let's see how much Lurie has in cap space come August 1st. Then tell me 'there wasn't anyone good available to spend the cap on.'

TO was under contract and WB was eventually signed to a big contract after he signed his RFA tender. They didn't spend much in FA last year because they had a team that had just been to the Super Bowl and had 14 picks in the upcoming draft and didn't have a lot of roster spots available. The large amount of cap space became available when Simon was dumped around 8/28 and when TO was suspended during the season. Who should they have picked up then? Also remember they started 05 with a carry over of only about 1.3M which is about the same the Skins started 05 with and both teams ended up 05 putting LTBE'd incentives in contracts with the difference being the Eagles had a much larger amount because of all the cap space freed up late.

The funny thing is the Eagles were so far in the dumper in 05 spending the extra wouldn't have made a difference but the Skins did real well in 05 and spending that cap space they put into Cartwright's contract early on might have brought an upgrade at a position that might have taken the Skins to the Super Bowl. Even with only a 5 year proration allowed in 05 1M of cap space can produce 5M of signing bonus so think what Danny could have done with that at perhaps WR[instead of Patten] that might have taken the Skins further.

[dockeryfan]

You defend the Eagles FA moves last year which consisted of Mike McMahon and the Bullet.

You are the ultra homer.

[TerpsEagles]

Look, don't take my word for it, ask Gene Upshaw. By doing what the Eagles have done (i.e., not spent allocated funds on players' salaries), they have been, in large part, responsible for union unrest...that's a fact.

It's pretty far from "fact". In fact, you are the only person I've seen state that or put it in print. Feel free to share a link or story from anyone other than yourself that mentions the Philadelphia Eagles and their spending as the reason for the labor unrest.

I'll wait.

[TerpsEagles]

So, why not spend that 'savings' at the beginning of free agency...like this year for instance. Or last year when TO and WB were there to sign?

perhaps because free agency has started yet ? dunno... just a guess here.

(and as for T.O. and WB..... you really need to just drop all that tr1. T.O. was entering the 2nd year of a contract that made him in the top 3 highest paid WR in the league. There was no reason to re-do it or give him more $$, other than in his and your minds. And WB got a very nice deal, and he got it just about exactly when us Eagles fans told you he would... it's when the team customarily does their extensions. Just because it didn't happen when you wanted to, oh well. Bottom line is they gave him a very nice deal that he was very happy to sign. Period)

You know what tr1... it dawned on me though.. maybe if Lurie just started gouging us Eagles fans in the wallet and hiking up stadium parking by 40% and hiking up lower stadium seat prices.... well maybe he would spend more on the team and just stop being so damn cheap and greedy.

[tr1]

It's pretty far from "fact". In fact, you are the only person I've seen state that or put it in print. Feel free to share a link or story from anyone other than yourself that mentions the Philadelphia Eagles and their spending as the reason for the labor unrest.

I'll wait.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/02/AR2006020202350.html

"Tagliabue, meantime, is trying to get owners to agree to a plan to increase the degree to which the wealthiest franchises would share their locally generated revenues with needier teams. The two sets of negotiations are taking place simultaneously, and Upshaw said the biggest holdup to deals on both fronts is that some owners of the most prosperous clubs are taking advantage of the current system. He said he does not include the Washington Redskins' Daniel Snyder in that category.

"You have to take Dan Snyder out," Upshaw said. "He's completely different. He's got a high-revenue club, and he spends money on his players. We like that. There are high-revenue clubs who are spending less than $66 million on their players, and that's out of $300 million. That's not a fair share."

At the time of the TO fracas, Upshaw made a couple of pointed remarks about the Eagles. I believe this statement refers to teams 'gaming' the system. Tell me the Eagles aren't one of the teams he's referring to.

[TerpsEagles]

That does NOT say "Philadelphia Eagles".

Got any others ?

[tr1]

There was no reason to re-do it or give him more $$, other than in his and your minds.

Mind set of a loser. TO was very valuable to your team...and worth the money to shut him up. He played on an injury in the SB for you guys :doh: ...but that's okay, he wasn't worth it (though, now I wouldn't pay him a nickle.)

And WB got a very nice deal, and he got it just about exactly when us Eagles fans told you he would... it's when the team customarily does their extensions. Just because it didn't happen when you wanted to, oh well. Bottom line is they gave him a very nice deal that he was very happy to sign. Period)

After the Eagles had jerked him all over. How many MONTHS did they leave him hanging? WB got the pay day because TO wasn't signed.

You know what tr1... it dawned on me though.. maybe if Lurie just started gouging us Eagles fans in the wallet and hiking up stadium parking by 40% and hiking up lower stadium seat prices.... well maybe he would spend more on the team and just stop being so damn cheap and greedy.

All Snyder has proven is that if you pay, you go to playoffs. He paid a premium for coaches and he's beginning to pay players according to current worth, not past worth.

I like the track we're on.

Too bad Lurie can't spend on decent back-ups...you might have made the playoffs last year :laugh:

[tr1]

That does NOT say "Philadelphia Eagles".

Got any others ?

Give Upshaw some credit for not calling the Eagles and other teams out explicitly...but everyone at the negotiation table knows who he's talking about: the wealthy teams who don't spend their cap = EAGLES.

[TerpsEagles]

Congrats on your 2 playoff games last year. Though, I thought the goal was to win the SB... that's what you all keep telling us lowly Eagles fans...... and to think, the Skins still had some $$ to spend..... amazing that they didn't spend it, huh?

Perhaps they would have beaten Seattle if they had spent all their money. Sigh.

And I can't believe that I didn't see your point until just now. Yup, Dan Snyder has proven that by spending $$, you can play in 4 whole playoff games in a 7 year span. That's awesome.

Going back to your T.O. theory. Are you saying that every valuable player on the Skins gets a new contract every year, with more money ? I mean, they must right ?? THey're valuable to your team... doesn't matter if they just signed a deal a year ago... rip it up, give 'em more. That's how it works, huh ?

You missed your calling tr1. You really should own an NFL franchise.

[TerpsEagles]

Give Upshaw some credit for not calling the Eagles and other teams out explicitly...but everyone at the negotiation table knows who he's talking about: the wealthy teams who don't spend their cap = EAGLES.

Actually, he said that some high revenue clubs spend even less that $66 Million on their payroll. But whatever.

So now you're saying "the Eagles and other teams", but when you go on one of your rants, it's pretty much just the Eagles that are behind all this, right ?