Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Another Bradford opinion
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Zero
John Clayton has always seemed to have a reasonable grasp on things NFL.
QUOTE
The Eagles have a decision to make when it comes to quarterback Sam Bradford, who is set to become a free agent this offseason.

The debate is going on in San Francisco as well, and speaking on radio row Tuesday, ESPN analyst John Clayton sounded skeptical that the Eagles should pay what it will take to keep Bradford.

"I think they should, but they have to watch the price. Maybe if they want to do a provisional contract, like Nick Foles (got from the St. Louis Rams) at two years, $24 million and change, that would be a fair thing," Clayton said. "If the cost goes up to $16 million, that is manageable, but it would have to be a (Miami Dolphins quarterback) Ryan Tannehill type deal, where they could get out of it after a year or two."
A two year deal, or two years in essence would be ideal for the team, and if there isn't a hot market for Bradford it would benefit him as well giving him a chance to prove he can stay healthy and perform at a high level. The Eagles would draft a young QB and have some time to develop him to either replace Bradford or trade if they keep him.

The other thing that I don't remember being mentioned is the probable compensation the Eagles would get if he is signed to a big contract by another team. Isn't the contract size the determining factor? Seattle is getting a third rounder for us signing Maxwell. Would Bradford garner the same thing? Not the second we lost, but decent, especially if the team decides they really don't want him.

BTW, this isn't the first time we've heard about a short term deal for Sam so there could be teeth to it.
SAM I Am
QUOTE (Zero @ Feb 3 2016, 06:13 AM) *
John Clayton has always seemed to have a reasonable grasp on things NFL.
A two year deal, or two years in essence would be ideal for the team, and if there isn't a hot market for Bradford it would benefit him as well giving him a chance to prove he can stay healthy and perform at a high level. The Eagles would draft a young QB and have some time to develop him to either replace Bradford or trade if they keep him.

The other thing that I don't remember being mentioned is the probable compensation the Eagles would get if he is signed to a big contract by another team. Isn't the contract size the determining factor? Seattle is getting a third rounder for us signing Maxwell. Would Bradford garner the same thing? Not the second we lost, but decent, especially if the team decides they really don't want him.

BTW, this isn't the first time we've heard about a short term deal for Sam so there could be teeth to it.

I'd gladly give him a 2 year deal, and if he won't go for that, I'd tag him. I just would not commit to him long term at this point.
Phits
QUOTE (SAM I Am @ Feb 3 2016, 07:29 AM) *
I'd gladly give him a 2 year deal, and if he won't go for that, I'd tag him. I just would not commit to him long term at this point.

Yep. This has been my opinion all along. His rookie deal was a "show me" contract. He failed to live up to expectations....by a wide margin. He has the potential. At this stage in his career it's very questionable whether he will live up to his #1 draft status.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (SAM I Am @ Feb 3 2016, 07:29 AM) *
I'd gladly give him a 2 year deal, and if he won't go for that, I'd tag him. I just would not commit to him long term at this point.


I think a short term deal right now is what both want because, as each day passes, it appears there is no real hot market for him. This is not the first mention of a short term deal which tells me that Condon is preparing for plan B and another "show me" situation.

Sadly there really are only 2 options, you either sign him long term or to an affordable short term deal. Tagging him is not an option because it is grossly cost prohibitive. It would play into the hands of Condon by giving Bradford an extremely lucrative 'show me" deal. (and, more importantly, cost me wings and beer in my bet with Mikey..lol)
Joegrane
I still am skeptical that they can get that deal done under the cap according to the data at the cap websites.

Cutting Cooper and Ryans only gets them around $8mil in cap relief, correct?

QUOTE
"I think they should, but they have to watch the price. Maybe if they want to do a provisional contract, like Nick Foles (got from the St. Louis Rams) at two years, $24 million and change, that would be a fair thing," Clayton said. "If the cost goes up to $16 million, that is manageable, but it would have to be a (Miami Dolphins quarterback) Ryan Tannehill type deal, where they could get out of it after a year or two."
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Feb 3 2016, 04:45 PM) *
I still am skeptical that they can get that deal done under the cap according to the data at the cap websites.

Cutting Cooper and Ryans only gets them around $8mil in cap relief, correct?


The Eagles cap was reported on today after they signed Curry on Quick Slants on CSN. They said that with the new deals and the carryover from last year the Eagles have around 25 million in cap space right now...
Joegrane
Thanks for that. The carry-over number was an important unknown for me. Also I think the teams have somewhat of a decision to make regarding how they handle that number.

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Feb 3 2016, 09:06 PM) *
The Eagles cap was reported on today after they signed Curry on Quick Slants on CSN. They said that with the new deals and the carryover from last year the Eagles have around 25 million in cap space right now...

Reality Fan
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Feb 3 2016, 09:44 PM) *
Thanks for that. The carry-over number was an important unknown for me. Also I think the teams have somewhat of a decision to make regarding how they handle that number.



The carryover was 7.2 million....the cap space is now at 22 million before they cut Cooper and Ryans and Sanchez
GroundedBird
... just a thought....

What if the Eagles used the Non-Exclusive Franchise Tender offer on Bradford?

That is defined as...

Team must agree to pay player for one year at the percentage against the current salary cap of the five highest salaries over the previous five seasons. Players can negotiate with any club, but if the player signs with another club, the tag tendering team will receive two first-round draft choices as compensation

I think that will keep him in Philly for a lower cost. Then the Eagles could negotiate with him during the process for a longer term.

Also, if they draft a Quarterback and want to trade Sam, they could tender him then trade him to say... Denver if Manning retires
Joegrane
We discussed that option a week or so ago.
http://www.wingheads.com/index.php?showtop...mp;#entry282905

Would the Eagles have enough cap space to do that without cutting valuable players? A 1 year deal might cost them 16mil but the NE Franchise tag would likely cost >20mil

The articles I read on this subject indicated that it more commonly is just a bargaining method. The Eagles might get a 2nd round pick from someone for their trouble and risk.

You make a good point about Denver. They would likely prefer a veteran over a draft pick unless they really like their current #2 QB.

QUOTE (GroundedBird @ Feb 5 2016, 01:09 PM) *
... just a thought....

What if the Eagles used the Non-Exclusive Franchise Tender offer on Bradford?

That is defined as...

Team must agree to pay player for one year at the percentage against the current salary cap of the five highest salaries over the previous five seasons. Players can negotiate with any club, but if the player signs with another club, the tag tendering team will receive two first-round draft choices as compensation

I think that will keep him in Philly for a lower cost. Then the Eagles could negotiate with him during the process for a longer term.

Also, if they draft a Quarterback and want to trade Sam, they could tender him then trade him to say... Denver if Manning retires
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.