Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Mariota Mortgage
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Pages: 1, 2
Zero
QUOTE
"Last year, the Eagles offered the Tennessee Titans, and I know this" Schrager told Colin Cowherd in a radio interview Wednesday. "A 2015 first round pick, a 2015 second round pick, a 2016 first round pick and they said 'take any of our quarterbacks. "That's Sam Bradford Bradford, that's Sanchez, that's whoever. And, they said, take anyone on our defense. We want that No. 2 pick. We want Marcus Mariota."
Linc ...

Too steep for me. Would you?
nephillymike
NO. To steep.

And when you consider Chip's short term here, that would have been a real problem.

I heard they offered three firsts, McCoy and Foles to Tampa for the #1 pick as reported the other day on 97.5
Zero
Thank God Jeff cut him loose. It would have taken years to get back to a starting point if he had accomplished either of those trades, even with Howie at his most glorious. Wasn't it McCormack who traded the first five picks of the '76 draft ... or something like that?
Reality Fan
I am always skeptical when it comes from an "NFL Insider"...I am sure they discussed the possibility of a trade but this is now a 2nd version of the same story and it now suggests that these guys do not really know what was offered beyond draft picks (gee...takes a genius to realize that multiple picks would be involved) if an offer is even the right term to use. It would have been idiocy just trading all the picks though, in my opinion.
mcnabbulous
I would have done it.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 10:04 AM) *
I would have done it.

Me too. I know it's been one season, but MM has transitioned very well into the NFL.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Mar 18 2016, 08:30 AM) *
Me too. I know it's been one season, but MM has transitioned very well into the NFL.

If you think of the resources we've put into the position in recent seasons, without even finding a suitable resolution, it seems like a pretty obvious decision. Especially considering we are primed to spend another draft pick on a guy this year, it even further solidifies the point.

Get your QB. Everything else will fall into place after that.
Reality Fan
I am sorry, Marriota is a nice looking QB and I am sure he will be a decent QB but only a fool would trade that many picks AND your best defensive player(s) who happen to be young. How quickly we forget the Herschell Walker trade or the Rickey Williams trade or the Joey Galloway trade or the Trent Green trade. Mortgaging your future rarely works out well for you.(I concede that the Eagles did have one of the rare positive outcomes with Jason Peters)



Phits
The players you mentioned were two RB's and a WR. Franchise changing RB's or WR's are extremely rare. So those trades make no sense. However, Trent Green was traded for a first round pick (12th overall), which is a sound decision for a potential franchise QB.

Like Nabby said in an earlier post,

QUOTE
Get your QB. Everything else will fall into place after that.


How many resources have we used to find a suitable QB? and How many are we going to use before we find "the one"?

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 18 2016, 01:16 PM) *
I am sorry, Marriota is a nice looking QB and I am sure he will be a decent QB but only a fool would trade that many picks AND your best defensive player(s) who happen to be young. How quickly we forget the Herschell Walker trade or the Rickey Williams trade or the Joey Galloway trade or the Trent Green trade. Mortgaging your future rarely works out well for you.(I concede that the Eagles did have one of the rare positive outcomes with Jason Peters)
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Phits @ Mar 18 2016, 12:40 PM) *
The players you mentioned were two RB's and a WR. Franchise changing RB's or WR's are extremely rare. So those trades make no sense. However, Trent Green was traded for a first round pick (12th overall), which is a sound decision for a potential franchise QB.

Like Nabby said in an earlier post,



How many resources have we used to find a suitable QB? and How many are we going to use before we find "the one"?


If you want to comment please get your facts straight...Green was traded to the Chiefs for the 12th and the 150th pick... blah.gif and he was a decent QB WHO NEVER WON A PLAYOFF GAME AS A CHIEF! so tell me how successful that trade was.(not to mention in those 5 years the Chiefs had 2 seasons above .500, yep, outstanding...worked out really well) devil03.gif

And the others don't make sense? They certainly do because they illustrate the point that you do not mortgage the future for one player, does that help your understanding a little?

I even concede that the Green trade was not a brutal one in terms of compensation as trades go but giving up a huge hall for a draft pick is not a sound strategy.
mcnabbulous
Trent Green was an 8th round pick with no historic success prior to the KC trade. Comparing it to a guy that was drafted #2 overall with Mariota's upside is silly.

If the Eagles are fools for offering it, why is no one declaring the Titans fools for not accepting it? Because now they have a potential franchise QB. And that's all that really matters.
Phits
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 18 2016, 02:35 PM) *
If you want to comment please get your facts straight
...Green was traded to the Chiefs for the 12th and the 150th pick... blah.gif
Who needs facts when there's wikipedia tongue.gif

QUOTE
he was a decent QB WHO NEVER WON A PLAYOFF GAME AS A CHIEF! so tell me how successful that trade was.(not to mention in those 5 years the Chiefs had 2 seasons above .500, yep, outstanding...worked out really well) devil03.gif

Tony Gonzalez, one of the greatest TE's in history, only won a single playoff game his entire 16 year career....and that was in his final season as a player. The moral of the story...shit happens. Winning championships is the culmination of a series of perfect storms. There is no blueprint.


QUOTE
And the others don't make sense? They certainly do because they illustrate the point that you do not mortgage the future for one player, does that help your understanding a little?

Are you suggesting that WR and/or RB are as important (especially in today's NFL) as a QB? Without a doubt, QB is the most important position on the team. IMO it is more practical to build around a QB. Every other position is much more Free Agent friendly, meaning you can acquire the necessary talent via FA. It's not often that a gnuine franchise caliber QB is available through trade or free agency.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Phits @ Mar 18 2016, 02:06 PM) *
Who needs facts when there's wikipedia tongue.gif


Tony Gonzalez, one of the greatest TE's in history, only won a single playoff game his entire 16 year career....and that was in his final season as a player. The moral of the story...shit happens. Winning championships is the culmination of a series of perfect storms. There is no blueprint.



Are you suggesting that WR and/or RB are as important (especially in today's NFL) as a QB? Without a doubt, QB is the most important position on the team. IMO it is more practical to build around a QB. Every other position is much more Free Agent friendly, meaning you can acquire the necessary talent via FA. It's not often that a gnuine franchise caliber QB is available through trade or free agency.



While I agree that the QB is the most valued position on the team I do not agree that you sell the fleet to buy one captain. There is a limit. I conceded that the Green trade was not a bad deal and to me, that is about as risky as it gets. Do you think that Minny would not like to redo the Walker trade? They thought he was as transformational as any QB at the time. The Saints thought the same thing about WIlliams regardless of whether they were RBs. The bottom line is that there has to be a limit to how much you hurt your future to secure one player no matter the position. A great QB with a crappy line and bad WRs is handcuffed no matter how good he is.
mcnabbulous
Since the RG3 trade, which was a complete disaster for the Redskins; the Skins have won the division twice.

The idea that this type of trade is franchise crippling is overblown. And had RG3 worked out, it absolutely would have been worth it.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 02:24 PM) *
Since the RG3 trade, which was a complete disaster for the Redskins; the Skins have won the division twice.

The idea that this type of trade is franchise crippling is overblown. And had RG3 worked out, it absolutely would have been worth it.


But he did not, granted injury played a large part but the Skins also radically changed the offense to suit him and the league caught up to that quickly. hey won the division last year, not so much by what they did as by how bad their fellow division teams collapsing....unless you think that a year where Romo AND Dez go down AND another team collapses under the weight of their coaches ego AND the 3rd team continues to field a historically bad defense is a normal year.

WOuld you like to wager as to how the Skins finish this year?(at least they finally have a GM who says no to Snyder when he wants to sign every aging former star on the market)
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 03:00 PM) *
Trent Green was an 8th round pick with no historic success prior to the KC trade. Comparing it to a guy that was drafted #2 overall with Mariota's upside is silly.

If the Eagles are fools for offering it, why is no one declaring the Titans fools for not accepting it? Because now they have a potential franchise QB. And that's all that really matters.

How many QBs were drafted early with expectations of being a franchise QB on a shit team and ended up glassy eyed and ruined? Putting Mariota behind a bad line may be his ruin and it may have been the same if he were to have played behind the Eagles line. Having a franchise talent QB is great as long as he isn't killed. There's no telling if that will happen in Tennessee or if it would have happened in Philadelphia which means mortgaging the team's future in that kind of situation is a high risk, not a given. Too steep a price for me.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 18 2016, 02:05 PM) *
But he did not, granted injury played a large part but the Skins also radically changed the offense to suit him and the league caught up to that quickly. hey won the division last year, not so much by what they did as by how bad their fellow division teams collapsing....unless you think that a year where Romo AND Dez go down AND another team collapses under the weight of their coaches ego AND the 3rd team continues to field a historically bad defense is a normal year.

Winning the division or not is kind of irrelevant. The point is that they were competitive despite an absolute bust of a trade. It didn't decimate the franchise and that was with the QB not panning out. Imagine the alternative scenario where RG3 does become a star...

QUOTE
WOuld you like to wager as to how the Skins finish this year?(at least they finally have a GM who says no to Snyder when he wants to sign every aging former star on the market)

I don't really give a shit how they perform this year. They aren't nearly the trainwreck that people would have anticipated given the trading of 3 first round picks for a bust of a QB.

It's not as dire of a situation as people suggest.

Another example would be the Jets. Everyone talked about how drafting Geno would have been an absolute horror show, given his performance to date, but the Jets have gotten nothing from the first two choices in that draft and are completely fine. They are a QB away from being a very good team.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 18 2016, 02:49 PM) *
How many QBs were drafted early with expectations of being a franchise QB on a shit team and ended up glassy eyed and ruined?

I'm not sure what that has to do with us having traded for him. It has nothing to do with playing him, even last year. I would have been fine with bringing him in and sitting behind Sanchez for the year.

QUOTE
Putting Mariota behind a bad line may be his ruin and it may have been the same if he were to have played behind the Eagles line.

What about his performance last year suggests that he was even remotely ruined? Despite the shit show in TENN, his numbers were better than any year in Bradford's career.

QUOTE
Having a franchise talent QB is great as long as he isn't killed. There's no telling if that will happen in Tennessee or if it would have happened in Philadelphia which means mortgaging the team's future in that kind of situation is a high risk, not a given. Too steep a price for me.

So bench him for a year if the line is that much of a concern. He played fine despite the line problems in TENN. His bigger issues are the general lack of coaching and offensive talent in Nashville.

I'm not even sure why you're talking about it. His performance was more than fine despite those OL issues. High risk often means high reward. Mariota looks every bit the part of that reward.
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 06:14 PM) *
I'm not even sure why you're talking about it.

That's a strange question.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 18 2016, 05:17 PM) *
That's a strange question.

You're just worrying about something that hasn't proven to be a concern after his first season. It doesn't make sense.

But even if it does prove to occur, it still shouldn't prohibit aggressiveness.

Just out of curiosity, do you think the Titans should have made the deal?
Phits
The biggest issue facing young QB's in today's NFL is lack of development. Teams (especially their fanbase) expect drafted QB's to make an immediate impact. It's a pivotal position which requires proper growth. The 'win now' attitude impairs this development, in turn, college QB's make the jump to the big leagues before they are ready.
nephillymike
Algohlar, Rowe, M. Smith and Cox

For Mariota??

Sometimes the 1st's and 2nd's just aren't what we hope they would be.

as far as Cox goes, a great player who the market will pay more than a team should spend on that position. So how valuable is he long term?



mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Mar 18 2016, 05:49 PM) *
The biggest issue facing young QB's in today's NFL is lack of development. Teams (especially their fanbase) expect drafted QB's to make an immediate impact. It's a pivotal position which requires proper growth. The 'win now' attitude impairs this development, in turn, college QB's make the jump to the big leagues before they are ready.

I agree with all of this. I'm still not sure how it's relevant to whether we should be aggressive and do anything to acquire the right guy?

Just because other teams do it wrong doesn't mean that we would or should.

I'm all about drafting a guy and waiting until he is ready (which is what I always said should have been done with Geno).

*edit - read that thinking it was posted by Z. We are in agreement it seems.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 18 2016, 06:20 PM) *
Algohlar, Rowe, M. Smith and Cox

For Mariota??

Sometimes the 1st's and 2nd's just aren't what we hope they would be.

as far as Cox goes, a great player who the market will pay more than a team should spend on that position. So how valuable is he long term?

So what's your opinion on it? Would you have done the deal from our perspective? What about Tenn?
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 07:31 PM) *
You're just worrying about something that hasn't proven to be a concern after his first season. It doesn't make sense.

But even if it does prove to occur, it still shouldn't prohibit aggressiveness.

Just out of curiosity, do you think the Titans should have made the deal?

The deal would have been made before anything was known. Before anyone knew if Mariota would succeed, before anyone knew if he would blow out a knee ... before he was drafted. What has proven to be was only a guess at the time a deal would have been made. And no, if I were the Titans I would not have done it for exactly the argument you've been making. Aggressiveness is great except when you're ultimately accountable for what happens. Risk can be good, unnecessary risk not so much.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 08:23 PM) *
I agree with all of this. I'm still not sure how it's relevant to whether we should be aggressive and do anything to acquire the right guy?

I believe that if you're going to go "all in" to develop a QB, make sure that you are prepared to do so. I feel that we have the appropriate personnel to develop a QB properly. I also believe that signing Bradford to a 2 year deal, a (quality) back-up QB and a QB friendly coach puts us in the perfect position to do so.

QUOTE
Just because other teams do it wrong doesn't mean that we would or should.

I agree. If a player, that we value, is available we should make every effort to acquire them.

QUOTE
I'm all about drafting a guy and waiting until he is ready (which is what I always said should have been done with Geno).

Ditto.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 07:32 PM) *
So what's your opinion on it? Would you have done the deal from our perspective? What about Tenn?



To correct the deal it was Bradford, plus two 1st's, a 2nd and any defensive player (assume Cox). Remember Bradford was 13M Cox almost 8M of cap, plus our 1st, 2nd less Mariota.

For Mariota and about $20M of cap room.

$20M of cap buys a lot.

Yes, I correct myself after thinking about it, I do the deal.

To put it in perspective via current year cap, our ENTIRE FA haul was just below $20M of cap hit this year. (see breakdown in other post). People sometimes forget the cap impact.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 18 2016, 06:38 PM) *
The deal would have been made before anything was known. Before anyone knew if Mariota would succeed, before anyone knew if he would blow out a knee ... before he was drafted. What has proven to be was only a guess at the time a deal would have been made. And no, if I were the Titans I would not have done it for exactly the argument you've been making. Aggressiveness is great except when you're ultimately accountable for what happens. Risk can be good, unnecessary risk not so much.

I don't know. It just kinda sounds like a "I'm not going to leave my house because I might get hit by a car" mentality.

Sure, it's safer, but it's no way to live life (or win a SB in this example).
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 18 2016, 06:41 PM) *
To correct the deal it was Bradford, plus two 1st's, a 2nd and any defensive player (assume Cox). Remember Bradford was 13M Cox almost 8M of cap, plus our 1st, 2nd less Mariota.

For Mariota and about $20M of cap room.

$20M of cap buys a lot.

Yes, I correct myself after thinking about it, I do the deal.

To put it in perspective via current year cap, our ENTIRE FA haul was just below $20M of cap hit this year. (see breakdown in other post). People sometimes forget the cap impact.

Yeah the money is the other thing I don't think people were considering. This really seems like a no brainier to me.

The only part of it that would really hurt is Cox, but his cost may be so prohibitive that he may not be with us next year anyways.
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 08:47 PM) *
I don't know. It just kinda sounds like a "I'm not going to leave my house because I might get hit by a car" mentality.

If you take Cox out of the deal or exchange Cox for the '16 #1 I'm in. Your assumption that I'm avoiding all risk has no basis. The point is that there was too much risk and too many unknowns for me.
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 08:49 PM) *
Yeah the money is the other thing I don't think people were considering. This really seems like a no brainier to me.

The only part of it that would really hurt is Cox, but his cost may be so prohibitive that he may not be with us next year anyways.
I won't be surprised if Cox is traded.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 18 2016, 06:57 PM) *
If you take Cox out of the deal or exchange Cox for the '16 #1 I'm in. Your assumption that I'm avoiding all risk has no basis. The point is that there was too much risk and too many unknowns for me.

I guess I think it's too different conversations. Thinking the haul itself (draft picks + players) is too hard to stomach is one thing. Not making the move because of some fear that bad OL play will cripple his development is another.

It's the second one that didn't seem relevant to me. I didn't mean any disrespect.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 05:07 PM) *
Winning the division or not is kind of irrelevant. The point is that they were competitive despite an absolute bust of a trade. It didn't decimate the franchise and that was with the QB not panning out. Imagine the alternative scenario where RG3 does become a star...


I don't really give a shit how they perform this year. They aren't nearly the trainwreck that people would have anticipated given the trading of 3 first round picks for a bust of a QB.

It's not as dire of a situation as people suggest.

Another example would be the Jets. Everyone talked about how drafting Geno would have been an absolute horror show, given his performance to date, but the Jets have gotten nothing from the first two choices in that draft and are completely fine. They are a QB away from being a very good team.



ummm...they were 3-13 and 4-12 the 2 seasons before.......and that is competitive? You should slow down and think before you type...because, yes.....it did kill them for 2 years...and as the NFC East rebounds they will have a losing record again which is far more likely than RG3 becoming a star.

Now on the Jets silliness....

They got nothing from Sheldon Richardson? The guy who went to the Pro Bowl?
And they still have Dee Millner...he tore his achilles and then his wrist but he will be starting this year....he started slow his rookie year but ended as the defensive rookie of the month fo the final month of the season so I am guessing you might want to rethink that silliness.

I will chalk that up to an oops.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 18 2016, 07:20 PM) *
Algohlar, Rowe, M. Smith and Cox

For Mariota??

Sometimes the 1st's and 2nd's just aren't what we hope they would be.

as far as Cox goes, a great player who the market will pay more than a team should spend on that position. So how valuable is he long term?



So it would have been Algohlar....hindsight on this one.....and what would likely have been a top ten pick this year because our WR corp would have been even shakier....

Where did Marcus Smith come from....surely you do not think he was a real piece of the trade....and Cox is the center piece of your defense...and you want to get rid of him

Rowe is thought of very highly by his coaches who think he is going to be something special....
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 09:01 PM) *
I guess I think it's too different conversations. Thinking the haul itself (draft picks + players) is too hard to stomach is one thing. Not making the move because of some fear that bad OL play will cripple his development is another.

It's the second one that didn't seem relevant to me. I didn't mean any disrespect.

None taken. My position is more than one layer that goes to the level of risk. Giving up your top picks two years in a row and arguably your best player for an unknown is too much risk for me. Adding to the risk and the unknown is the ability for the player with undetermined ability at the NFL level to remain healthy behind an OL that had been ignored for two years. This doesn't make me right or you wrong, it's a matter of how much one is willing to gamble and how much you're willing to lose.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 18 2016, 07:41 PM) *
To correct the deal it was Bradford, plus two 1st's, a 2nd and any defensive player (assume Cox). Remember Bradford was 13M Cox almost 8M of cap, plus our 1st, 2nd less Mariota.

For Mariota and about $20M of cap room.

$20M of cap buys a lot.

Yes, I correct myself after thinking about it, I do the deal.

To put it in perspective via current year cap, our ENTIRE FA haul was just below $20M of cap hit this year. (see breakdown in other post). People sometimes forget the cap impact.



Whoa horsey...is Mariota playing for free or did he sign a 4 year 24 million dollar contract? So it is not 20 million of cap space.

And now you lose the ability to fill slots with lower priced draft picks and have to pay a FA premium to replace a guy with Cox if you want talent or you can go cheap and get a much lesser player. Nothing is free....You have more cap space and a much lesser defensive line.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 18 2016, 07:15 PM) *
ummm...they were 3-13 and 4-12 the 2 seasons before.......and that is competitive? You should slow down and think before you type...because, yes.....it did kill them for 2 years...and as the NFC East rebounds they will have a losing record again which is far more likely than RG3 becoming a star.

They were 5-11 the year before they drafted RG3. It didn't kill them too badly. And you can't point to that decision as the reason for their 2 years of struggles.

Their struggles will be the product of lots of variables, but they are able to compete despite a disaster of a trade.

QUOTE
Now on the Jets silliness....

They got nothing from Sheldon Richardson? The guy who went to the Pro Bowl?

My bad. I forgot about him. I was talking about Millner and Smith. Richardson is a beast, but he did miss 5 games this past year.
QUOTE
And they still have Dee Millner...he tore his achilles and then his wrist but he will be starting this year....he started slow his rookie year but ended as the defensive rookie of the month fo the final month of the season so I am guessing you might want to rethink that silliness.

So you are saying he has had one good month as a pro? Cmon, man - he has largely been considered a bust since entering the league and basically hasn't played the past two years. He might turn out to be fine, but he has been a non contributor thus far. Two starts in the past two years. You are reaching.

And so there is no doubt about my opinion on him, based on positional value, I thought the Eagles should have considered him at #4 that year.

QUOTE
I will chalk that up to an oops.

So two of their three top picks from 2013 made zero contribution to their team last year. And they were fine. My point stands.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 18 2016, 08:52 PM) *
They were 5-11 the year before they drafted RG3. It didn't kill them too badly. And you can't point to that decision as the reason for their 2 years of struggles.

Their struggles will be the product of lots of variables, but they are able to compete despite a disaster of a trade.


My bad. I forgot about him. I was talking about Millner and Smith. Richardson is a beast, but he did miss 5 games this past year.

So you are saying he has had one good month as a pro? Cmon, man - he has largely been considered a bust since entering the league and basically hasn't played the past two years. He might turn out to be fine, but he has been a non contributor thus far. Two starts in the past two years. You are reaching.

And so there is no doubt about my opinion on him, based on positional value, I thought the Eagles should have considered him at #4 that year.


So two of their three top picks from 2013 made zero contribution to their team last year. And they were fine. My point stands.


First...Millner blew out his achilles...he is not a bust...he will start this year.....he had bad luck with 2 injuries...and Richardson is a stud and blows your whole theory to bits....Gino was a cheap gamble.

Millner started slow but played great the 2nd half of the season....his injuries have been frustrating but he should start this year....if not than he is a bust...

And the Jets promptly went 4-12......by the way....and their coach got fired.....so fine may be an overstatement...
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 18 2016, 08:57 PM) *
First...Millner blew out his achilles...he is not a bust...he will start this year.....he had bad luck with 2 injuries...

How do you know he's not a bust? He has produced nothing in three years as a pro. He may turn out fine, but thus far, due to early struggles and injuries, he has been a bust.

QUOTE
and Richardson is a stud and blows your whole theory to bits....Gino was a cheap gamble.

Their 13 and 14 drafts were both extremely poor. Richardson was really the only one who contributed last year and he missed 5 games. And he was only on their roster because they traded their best player which resulted in the draft choice which they used to acquire him.

QUOTE
Millner started slow but played great the 2nd half of the season....his injuries have been frustrating but he should start this year....if not than he is a bust...

Millner's second half of his rookie year is irrelevant. He hasn't contributed in two years. He wasn't a factor in their competitive season. This despite them having essentially wasted the #6 pick on him to date.

QUOTE
And the Jets promptly went 4-12......by the way....and their coach got fired.....so fine may be an overstatement...

I'm talking about 2015. I'm not sure what you are getting at. Despite having extremely poor drafts in 2013 and 2014, the Jets are fine. The risk of trading away draft picks is overstated.
Reality Fan
I know you are talking about 2015...you are great at ignoring those pesky facts that detract from your point....and the Jets went crazy in Free Agency to have there 2015 season...and got rid of that idiot Rex Ryan. That is why they did well....Cromartie....Revis....Colon...Decker....should I go on.....their FAs meshed well...hopefully we are as lucky.

And as usual you drag this down and away from the original point....it is idiotic to trade away star players to draft a guy who might be a star player and equally as foolish to trade away a host of top draft selection spots. You put far too much pressure on that one spot to hit, beyond the stress you put on the rest of your personnel decisions.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 18 2016, 10:12 PM) *
And as usual you drag this down and away from the original point....it is idiotic to trade away star players to draft a guy who might be a star player and equally as foolish to trade away a host of top draft selection spots. You put far too much pressure on that one spot to hit, beyond the stress you put on the rest of your personnel decisions.

Well ya know, that's just like, your opinion man.

Regardless of whether you present it as fact.

nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 18 2016, 08:32 PM) *
Whoa horsey...is Mariota playing for free or did he sign a 4 year 24 million dollar contract? So it is not 20 million of cap space.

And now you lose the ability to fill slots with lower priced draft picks and have to pay a FA premium to replace a guy with Cox if you want talent or you can go cheap and get a much lesser player. Nothing is free....You have more cap space and a much lesser defensive line.



Compare Mariota's cap space for last year to our 1st and 2nd's cap space and our 1st cap space this year and offset it with Bradford and Cox and you'll get real close to 20M.

Sure we will have to use the $20M to buy players. Of course, to replace Cox etc.

But for a fun game, assume we spent the money on the guys we did this year, which was real close to $20M.

So all of the guys we signed in free agency + Mariota for Cox, 2 1sts and a 2nd and Bradford. If those picks are like our last three (Algohlar, Rowe and Smith) it's a no brainer. If they are Maclin, Simon and Dawkins, then it goes the other way.
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 19 2016, 06:20 AM) *
So all of the guys we signed in free agency + Mariota for Cox, 2 1sts and a 2nd and Bradford. If those picks are like our last three (Algohlar, Rowe and Smith) it's a no brainer. If they are Maclin, Simon and Dawkins, then it goes the other way.

It's not a no brainer! How has signing a truck load of FAs worked out for the team so far? It may have worked but the chances are just as good that it would have set us back another three to five years.
Eyrie
I'm not a fan of gambling everything on one roll of the dice.

Sure we could draft a stud QB with those picks, but equally we could take a bust. There are no guarantees in either route, but with multiple high picks the odds are that some will work out which gives you a stronger team.

The time to roll the dice is when you have enough other pieces in place on offense to support the new QB (eg a porous line will hurt the development of even the best prospect).

We're not in that position, and we weren't last year either.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 19 2016, 05:20 AM) *
Compare Mariota's cap space for last year to our 1st and 2nd's cap space and our 1st cap space this year and offset it with Bradford and Cox and you'll get real close to 20M.

Sure we will have to use the $20M to buy players. Of course, to replace Cox etc.

But for a fun game, assume we spent the money on the guys we did this year, which was real close to $20M.

So all of the guys we signed in free agency + Mariota for Cox, 2 1sts and a 2nd and Bradford. If those picks are like our last three (Algohlar, Rowe and Smith) it's a no brainer. If they are Maclin, Simon and Dawkins, then it goes the other way.


I like that..."sure we have to replace Cox" as if that is no problem...and then you assume to know that Algohar would not do well in his first year......

But I will stick with Rowe and Algohar and Cox......and how you lump in Smith with the other 2 is beyond me. Smith was a terrible mistake and you treat it as if it is the norm.

Now on to the math.....you point to Mariota's cap hit for last year against the cap hit from last year AND this year's for draft picks. Shouldn't it be Mariota's cap hit in both years? It is not a simple consideration.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 19 2016, 04:20 AM) *
So all of the guys we signed in free agency + Mariota for Cox, 2 1sts and a 2nd and Bradford. If those picks are like our last three (Algohlar, Rowe and Smith) it's a no brainer. If they are Maclin, Simon and Dawkins, then it goes the other way.

The other thing people aren't considering is the future resources we are going to spend on a QB.

In recent years, we have spent a 4, a 2 and we are primed to spend another round 1-3 pick on the position again this year.
Phits
It's much easier to fill the other holes after you have the right QB. Quality defensive and offensive players can regularly be found in free agency....the exception is at QB. It is extremely rare to find a franchise leader at the pivot spot, so you have to risk draft picks and resources to find and develop him properly.

A porous o-line can be fixed in a single off-season. More importantly, you may not have the "right" linemen for the QB acquired. Protecting and blocking for a Cam Newton type player (mobile) is very different than a Tom Brady (pocket passer).

QUOTE (Eyrie @ Mar 19 2016, 07:47 AM) *
I'm not a fan of gambling everything on one roll of the dice.

Sure we could draft a stud QB with those picks, but equally we could take a bust. There are no guarantees in either route, but with multiple high picks the odds are that some will work out which gives you a stronger team.

The time to roll the dice is when you have enough other pieces in place on offense to support the new QB (eg a porous line will hurt the development of even the best prospect).

We're not in that position, and we weren't last year either.

Eyrie
QUOTE (Phits @ Mar 19 2016, 07:02 PM) *
It's much easier to fill the other holes after you have the right QB. Quality defensive and offensive players can regularly be found in free agency....the exception is at QB. It is extremely rare to find a franchise leader at the pivot spot, so you have to risk draft picks and resources to find and develop him properly.

A porous o-line can be fixed in a single off-season. More importantly, you may not have the "right" linemen for the QB acquired. Protecting and blocking for a Cam Newton type player (mobile) is very different than a Tom Brady (pocket passer).

So you'd draft what you expect to be the franchise QB, then hinder his development by having him adapt to the pro game without decent protection?

Not for me. I fix the OL first and then take the QB that fits my offensive system. That system will then need adapted to suit the QB, but that applies to any position. No-one will take a player whose skill set means that the entire offense needs to be changed.

There is an argument to be made for drafting the right QB and fixing the OL in the same offseason, but that means having a decent placeholder QB whilst the OL develop familiarity with their roles and each other. The rookie can then take over late in the season or in year two. It wouldn't surprise me if that is the approach that the Eagles take and, assuming the rookie shows enough progression, Bradford will be our placeholder and traded next March. Daniel is the long term back up.
Zero
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Mar 20 2016, 07:53 AM) *
I fix the OL first and then take the QB that fits my offensive system. That system will then need adapted to suit the QB, but that applies to any position. No-one will take a player whose skill set means that the entire offense needs to be changed.

There is an argument to be made for drafting the right QB and fixing the OL in the same offseason, but that means having a decent placeholder QB whilst the OL develop familiarity with their roles and each other. The rookie can then take over late in the season or in year two. It wouldn't surprise me if that is the approach that the Eagles take and, assuming the rookie shows enough progression, Bradford will be our placeholder and traded next March. Daniel is the long term back up.

Yes. I also agree with Phits but, as you say the problem comes when putting a talented rookie QB in an offense that isn't ready for success. Not just QB, BTW. How many talented players have been ruined by putting them in bad situations where they're not able to succeed? The doubts grow like weeds and choke out the confidence that's critical to their game.
nephillymike
At the current moment we have the 8th pick, which MAY be good enough for a top 2 QB in the draft.

We have to think about the current cost of that # 8 pick (just a few player trades to get from 13 to 8).

If we are 8-8 or better, we would likely be drafting high teens early twenties. What is the cost to get one there?

I can see the theory of taking one at #8 if you like the one that's there, you take him here as you might not get the opportunity to do so at this reasonable price for quite a while.

Unless, Bradford does poorly and Daniels can't hold the fort down, and we are drafting around 8 again next year.

FWIW, they are rated the 24th best team in preseason power ratings, so if the "experts" know what they're talking about, that puts us at drafting at #9 next year.

I think, except for the chasm at WR, there is still too much talent on this team to be sub .500 in this weak division. You can say the system will slow us down, but we've seen with Chip and Rhodes, system switches don't have to be devastating year one as both posted 10-6 playoff teams in year one. If Pedey is close to them, he should at least get to 9-7 or 8-8.

Any support for the "draft him now because we won't be this high in the draft for a while" theory?
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.