Eagles outspent Skins by 14m from 01-04

[sableholic]

Do you think they let them go because of cheapness or because they thought they had a plan to replace them?

Simon... cheapness

[dockeryfan]

Do you think they let them go because of cheapness or because they thought they had a plan to replace them?

I think they let them all go because of money. How can we think otherwise?

Burgess got a big contract

Simon, they didn't want to pay the tag and thought he was going to be fat for the first 8 games like the year before

Mayberry, too old, not worth it in their mind.

The plan to replace Burgess hinged on McDougal, but he never really looked all that good anyway, even before he was shot.

With Simon, it honestly did not look like they had a plan. I guess they thought they were stoked at DT with Patterson coming on.

Mayberry, I guess they had to let some of the draft picks play, but we didn't see Clarke, who I thought would get more PT.

So maybe a plan in terms of O-line, but not in terms of D-line. No there didn't look like much of a plan.

[sableholic]

Moss was not a FA addition

ah true, some reason I forgot about the whole Coleslaw thing. Guess I was trying to erase bad memories, my bad. But anyways you could make the argument that we didn't really lose a step with Marshall taking Pierce's place and Smooty didn't do much in Minny.

[Westbrook36]

Simon... cheapness

You talking about the guy who had 0 sacks this year, showed up for training camp around 360 lbs, and is now getting released after signing a big deal last year?

Is that the Corey Simon you are talking about?

[Westbrook36]

I think they let them all go because of money. How can we think otherwise?

Burgess got a big contract

Simon, they didn't want to pay the tag and thought he was going to be fat for the first 8 games like the year before

Mayberry, too old, not worth it in their mind.

The plan to replace Burgess hinged on McDougal, but he never really looked all that good anyway, even before he was shot.

With Simon, it honestly did not look like they had a plan. I guess they thought they were stoked at DT with Patterson coming on.

Mayberry, I guess they had to let some of the draft picks play, but we didn't see Clarke, who I thought would get more PT.

So maybe a plan in terms of O-line, but not in terms of D-line. No there didn't look like much of a plan.

Because a plan doesn't work out, you can't say there wasn't a plan.

At OL, they have been drafting there for years as it's the deepest position on the team....especially at guard. Why pay a 33 year old guy who hadn't had a completely healthy year in like 3 years. BTW, NO is releasing him this week.

Burgess turned out to be a mistake but he had TWO SACKS all of last year while missing 30+ games over 3 years. Is that the guy you want to invest a 20 million dollar deal to? You also have a former 15th pick guy who started coming on at the end of the previous year. Can anyone predict someone getting shot?

At DT, you had Rayburn coming off a six sack year who wound up getting hurt. Same with Walker. I was comfortable with the move until everyone started getting hurt. It's ok. If it allows us to get Bunkley this year, I'll be fine with it.

The problem is you are playing armchair GM a year later as if all these issues were completely obvious last offseason.

[sableholic]

You talking about the guy who had 0 sacks this year, showed up for training camp around 360 lbs, and is now getting released after signing a big deal last year?

Is that the Corey Simon you are talking about?

He's a DT not a DE, so not sure why sacks are of importance. I'd say he did a good job as the Colts D went up from 24th in the league in rushing D to 16th.

Think you should read this:

http://www.phillyburbs.com/football101/ddt.shtml

On a side note can you link me to where you see he is getting released?

They just released their DT Williams, I haven't seen any other information.

"QUESTION: What is the deal with Corey Simon's contract? I heard over the summer it had a one-year guarantee and an option to pick it up for additional years (at much more money). A) Is it true and do you think we can keep him and everyone else?

-- from Jay, Wayne, NJ

ANSWER: There was some confusion and subsequent misinformation on Simon's contract. He signed a five-year, $30 million contract that included a $5 million signing bonus and another $6 million bonus due in 2006. The '06 bonus is guaranteed, so there's no question Simon will be back. When the Colts did the deal, they obviously budgeted the future costs. It's not going to be easy to keep everyone - Edgerrin James, Reggie Wayne, David Thornton, Raheem Brock, Rob Morris, Mike Vanderjagt. Somehow, though, the team will make the tough decisions and re-sign the players they consider the most vital."

http://blogs.indystar.com/coltsinsider/

[Pocono]

Nope just sentence above. Because if this sentence includes the fact he may not have received the money in the figure, what good does it do to add this figure to his bonus money? The basis of the combined figure can be incorrect therefore the total figure can be incorrect. So its all bogus.

OK....Let's try this again. Take a look at the first player on this list.

http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/teamdetail.aspx?team=24&year=2002

It's Keith Adams. See his base salary? It says 300K which is the amount in his contract. See his total salary and cap hit? It's a lot less because he was claimed on waivers from the Cowboys during the season so that total salary number reflects the amount of pay he received from the Eagles. So what you think makes the numbers bogus is actually proof that the numbers are exact and reliable.

[Westbrook36]

He's a DT not a DE, so not sure why sacks are of importance. I'd say he did a good job as the Colts D went up from 24th in the league in rushing D to 16th.

Think you should read this:

http://www.phillyburbs.com/football101/ddt.shtml

On a side note can you link me to where you see he is getting released?

They just released their DT Williams, I haven't seen any other information.

"QUESTION: What is the deal with Corey Simon's contract? I heard over the summer it had a one-year guarantee and an option to pick it up for additional years (at much more money). A) Is it true and do you think we can keep him and everyone else?

-- from Jay, Wayne, NJ

ANSWER: There was some confusion and subsequent misinformation on Simon's contract. He signed a five-year, $30 million contract that included a $5 million signing bonus and another $6 million bonus due in 2006. The '06 bonus is guaranteed, so there's no question Simon will be back. When the Colts did the deal, they obviously budgeted the future costs. It's not going to be easy to keep everyone - Edgerrin James, Reggie Wayne, David Thornton, Raheem Brock, Rob Morris, Mike Vanderjagt. Somehow, though, the team will make the tough decisions and re-sign the players they consider the most vital."

http://blogs.indystar.com/coltsinsider/

His main job for the Eagles was to shoot gaps and apply pressure on the QB. Seeing he had 0 sacks last year, I guess you'd agree he wouldn't have been much of a help.

sable, you post a link where they say there has been much confusion and subsequent misinformation regarding his contract status yet you call me a liar in your final sentence when I write that I heard these same things. What gives?

[Number5]

Because a plan doesn't work out, you can't say there wasn't a plan.

At OL, they have been drafting there for years as it's the deepest position on the team....especially at guard. Why pay a 33 year old guy who hadn't had a completely healthy year in like 3 years. BTW, NO is releasing him this week.

Burgess turned out to be a mistake but he had TWO SACKS all of last year while missing 30+ games over 3 years. Is that the guy you want to invest a 20 million dollar deal to? You also have a former 15th pick guy who started coming on at the end of the previous year. Can anyone predict someone getting shot?

At DT, you had Rayburn coming off a six sack year who wound up getting hurt. Same with Walker. I was comfortable with the move until everyone started getting hurt. It's ok. If it allows us to get Bunkley this year, I'll be fine with it.

The problem is you are playing armchair GM a year later as if all these issues were completely obvious last offseason.

Damn, why don't you tell him he has a booger in his nose while you're at it! :laugh:

Lol......WB "The Beast Of The East!"

Get'em bro!

[sableholic]

sable, you post a link where they say there has been much confusion and subsequent misinformation regarding his contract status yet you call me a liar in your final sentence when I write that I heard these same things. What gives?

and is now getting released after signing a big deal last year?

You said it as fact, where it was rumored to be a option. Even though that rumor was incorrect, having the option still doesn't equal they will do it. I was merely calling you on your statement that he was being cut when I had heard no such thing. I thought we all pointed out our misinformations on this board? I know you have pointed out multiple misinformations skins fans have had in regards to CBA talks, so I didn't think I was calling you a liar. Just pointing out a wrong when I saw it.

His main job for the Eagles was to shoot gaps and apply pressure on the QB. Seeing he had 0 sacks last year, I guess you'd agree he wouldn't have been much of a help.

Just cause the Colts didn't use him for that doesn't mean he couldn't have done it. I don't think the Colts defensive problems have been not getting enough pressure as Freeney was doing a good job before Simon got there. Maybe he could have helped you guys who knows? I'm just saying I don't think you let him go because you wanted too, but because he wanted more money than you were willing to pay. Which is fine by me. I just don't think its right to say they released him because they didnt want him. Anyways we've gotten pretty off topic haven't we, I think you can safely say the Eagles FO isn't cheap, but it certainly isn't #1 over last 4 years and they do operate differently then most clubs.

[Westbrook36]

Well, you said I was making it up where I had read it several places....I guess we'll see.

[sableholic]

Well, you said I was making it up where I had read it several places....I guess we'll see.

Well I did start by asking for a link to where you saw it, but your right maybe that last line was out of line. Anyways updated both comments on previous page.

On a completely off-topic note, do you think the CBA will be extended? If not you'll get your wish to see our no CBA plan. Should be interesting to say the least.

[kingfish50]

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.

Excuse me for the spelling error. Must make you feel pretty big to point that out. My point was that I was agreeing with another post when I said " they just don't get it" You come back at me like an arrogant (Gee, did I spell that right?) ass (not calling you one so don't be so sensative). You either misunderstood my post or your just being a wise ass. I tend to think the latter, but really, who gives a damn.

[Westbrook36]

Well I did start by asking for a link to where you saw it, but your right maybe that last line was out of line. Anyways updated both comments on previous page.

On a completely off-topic note, do you think the CBA will be extended? If not you'll get your wish to see our no CBA plan. Should be interesting to say the least.

I am torn on this. I keep hearing the teams with a lot of cap room will have a distinct advantage without an extension. I have my heart set on Bentley and perhaps a few others so I almost want there to be no extension.

But on the other hand.....ugh....I don't even want to think about it. :doh:

[redskinss]

The truth is that Snyder gets all the pub for being a big spender but year after year, he isn't able to spend as much actual cash as teams like the Eagles because he has so much dead money accumulated (which is never paid out of his pocket). Yet, he continues to do things like raise parking 40 percent, squeezing every dime he can out of the loyal fanbase. It's funny, Skins fans like to brag about how the Skins are the most valuable franchise in the NFL.....until the prices get raised again and then you have a 10 page thread where reality strikes. I just like to sit back and watch.

im no cap expert but if not mistaken, dead money is what is left over from prorated bonuses when a player is released. therefore it was once paid out of pocket by the owner

[sableholic]

I am torn on this. I keep hearing the teams with a lot of cap room will have a distinct advantage without an extension. I have my heart set on Bentley and perhaps a few others so I almost want there to be no extension.

But on the other hand.....ugh....I don't even want to think about it. :doh:

Well, will those teams actually spend the money? I'm looking at the Browns, Saints, and other small market teams when I say that, not Philly. I mean its nice that they have a ton of room, but using it is a different story. Unless you were referring to some other teams? But I can understand why you want Bentley, definately would be a solid addition. But you know part of you wants to see how the skins would handle no extension after our long discussions.

[dockeryfan]

Because a plan doesn't work out, you can't say there wasn't a plan.

At OL, they have been drafting there for years as it's the deepest position on the team....especially at guard. Why pay a 33 year old guy who hadn't had a completely healthy year in like 3 years. BTW, NO is releasing him this week.

Burgess turned out to be a mistake but he had TWO SACKS all of last year while missing 30+ games over 3 years. Is that the guy you want to invest a 20 million dollar deal to? You also have a former 15th pick guy who started coming on at the end of the previous year. Can anyone predict someone getting shot?

At DT, you had Rayburn coming off a six sack year who wound up getting hurt. Same with Walker. I was comfortable with the move until everyone started getting hurt. It's ok. If it allows us to get Bunkley this year, I'll be fine with it.

The problem is you are playing armchair GM a year later as if all these issues were completely obvious last offseason.

The consensus had been pretty much that McDougal was a bust.

You have to have read that from other people last year.

And taking a pro bowl lineman in Simon and making due with Rayburn/Patterson/Hollis? That was never a good plan and I think you knew that then.

It's not a matter of being an armchair GM.

We can do it for this year as well. Pinkston will not be the same player he was. If the plan is for him to stretch the field the way he used to, that's a bad plan.

[Number5]

Pinkston will not be the same player he was. If the plan is for him to stretch the field the way he used to, that's a bad plan.

Agreed, but I hae this sick feeling in my stomach that says that if Jimmy Thrash is cut, he'll be heading back up I95. And his greatest amount of success was with.....you guessed it, the Philadelphia Eagles.

I hate to say it, but I'd rather have a starting line-up of Thrash/Brown more than a Pinky/Brown line-up. At least Thrash goes over the middle and can "survive" a big hit or two. Plus, he won the 2001 NFC EAST title for us against the Giants, so he'll always get love from me! :point2sky but only in midnight green!

[dockeryfan]

Agreed, but I hae this sick feeling in my stomach that says that if Jimmy Thrash is cut, he'll be heading back up I95. And his greatest amount of success was with.....you guessed it, the Philadelphia Eagles.

I hate to say it, but I'd rather have a starting line-up of Thrash/Brown more than a Pinky/Brown line-up. At least Thrash goes over the middle and can "survive" a big hit or two. Plus, he won the 2001 NFC EAST title for us against the Giants, so he'll always get love from me! :point2sky but only in midnight green!

I sure hope you are wrong.

There doesn't seem to be any indication he will be leaving.

[BigDFan5]

Understood. I was speaking more specifically between the Eagles and Redskins.

And, I think I could make an argument that, despite the division standings, the Redskins were the best team in the division last year.

As long as you werent talking the whole division, because no matter what argument you made the reality of the situation is the Giants no matter how much we might hate it. were the best team in the division

[tr1]

Sable....

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/30/301623.html

You see that little 6 next to player expenses? If you see what that 6 means it says includes benefits and bonuses. Benefits are not part of the cap formula. They are paid from a separate pool and really have no effect on the team that's put on the field because they are not negotiated by individual players. The Forbes numbers are the USA numbers + benefits.

:doh:

Benefits and bonuses...LTBEs? Yes or no. Answer: you don't know.

How do I know the Eagles are cheap? Short answer: The large amount of cap room they have...that's money allocated that hasn't been spent...let me say it a bit slower for you guys in the slow group...that's...money...that...has...been...allocated...for...player....salaries...but ...it...hasn't...been...spent....It...remains...in...the...owners....pocket.

You guys crack me up...you're so blinded by your twisted logic that you've lost all ability to argue in a rational manner. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I'm starting to feel sorry for you guys.

Not!

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[TD_washingtonredskins]

As long as you werent talking the whole division, because no matter what argument you made the reality of the situation is the Giants no matter how much we might hate it. were the best team in the division

No, I was definitely specifically speaking of the Eagles and Redskins. However, I do disagree with your statement (it's another topic for another thread though). My take would be that the Giants won the division but weren't necessarily the best team in the division at the end of the year.

I fully admit this is my opinion and I have very little to hang my hat on (since the Giants are the champs of the East) but the late-season game between the Skins and Giants coupled with the playoff success makes it tough for me to call New York the better team.

[HOF44]

OK....Let's try this again. Take a look at the first player on this list.

See post #146. TR1 sums it up pretty good in this post.

[Westbrook36]

:doh:

Benefits and bonuses...LTBEs? Yes or no. Answer: you don't know.

How do I know the Eagles are cheap? Short answer: The large amount of cap room they have...that's money allocated that hasn't been spent...let me say it a bit slower for you guys in the slow group...that's...money...that...has...been...allocated...for...player....salaries...but ...it...hasn't...been...spent....It...remains...in...the...owners....pocket.

You guys crack me up...you're so blinded by your twisted logic that you've lost all ability to argue in a rational manner. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I'm starting to feel sorry for you guys.

Not!

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

tr1, where you are mistaken is you see the amount the team is over the cap WHEN THE NEW LEAGUE SEASON STARTS AND BEFORE FREE AGENCY. This is simply managing the cap well. Just because the Eagles aren't starting every year over the cap doesn't mean they are cheap.

At the end of each year, they are right against the cap. You just really don't understand the basics enough to discuss this rationally.

[TerpsEagles]

You are tiresome.

I think you are the only eaglefan I have seen defend the 2004 offseason free agent moves.

Think Burkhalter was going to contribute in the least is rediculous.

ND Kalu being the every down DE is almost as funny.

Think those two would be the solution to the 2004 offseason. Priceless.

Let me guess. You think Pinkston will return to his speedster form.

It's more plausible than Burkhalter having any kind of role.

You have become a cartoon eaglefan, because you are ultra homer.

So Dockery, based on your contention that no Eagles fan should have had any hope whatsover for Kalu being a major contributor prior to the '05 season, than all Redskins fans should have wanted BOTH Wynn and Daniels cut from the team and somebody new brought in prior to the Skins '05 season, right ? I mean you saw their contributions in '04... so to have held out ANY hope.. .I mean any, would make a Skins fan an "ultra homer", right ?

Again, you seem to only post w/ the benefit of hindsight when it comes the Eagles.