Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Foles contract numbers are in
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
nephillymike
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/philadelphia-ea...ick-foles-9898/

The Eagles are using the voidable years method of lessening his cap hit.

That was something that those bad cap strapped teams used to use when cap was tighter.

I never remember the Eagles using this, and for a backup QB, no less.

This is a little concerning. We are set up for a big future cap hit.

It has a little desperate feel to it.

Joegrane
So maybe consistent with the thought that they are trying to make a run this year while Sproles and Peters are still here.

I've never heard of "voidable years method" Could you explain?


QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 19 2017, 10:12 PM) *
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/philadelphia-ea...ick-foles-9898/

The Eagles are using the voidable years method of lessening his cap hit.

That was something that those bad cap strapped teams used to use when cap was tighter.

I never remember the Eagles using this, and for a backup QB, no less.

This is a little concerning. We are set up for a big future cap hit.

It has a little desperate feel to it.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Mar 19 2017, 10:58 PM) *
So maybe consistent with the thought that they are trying to make a run this year while Sproles and Peters are still here.

I've never heard of "voidable years method" Could you explain?

https://overthecap.com/the-voidable-year-and-the-salary-cap/

This is a good summary.

Note the negative tone.

It does look like they are pulling out all of the cap tricks.
nephillymike
Think about this,

The Eagles are spending $9M cash on backup QB this year, after spending $7M last year, for a cool $16 M of cash over 2 years.

If I'm Lurie, that's a real tough sell.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 20 2017, 07:52 PM) *
Think about this,

The Eagles are spending $9M cash on backup QB this year, after spending $7M last year, for a cool $16 M of cash over 2 years.

If I'm Lurie, that's a real tough sell.


That assumes that Daniel does not sign anywhere, correct?
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 20 2017, 08:09 PM) *
That assumes that Daniel does not sign anywhere, correct?

Yes.

But I can't imagine anyone signing him for more than the Vet minimum, given that they get the supplement from the Eagles to bring his salary up to what the Eagles were generously providing for.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 20 2017, 09:18 PM) *
Yes.

But I can't imagine anyone signing him for more than the Vet minimum, given that they get the supplement from the Eagles to bring his salary up to what the Eagles were generously providing for.


unless there are 2 teams interested in him (I know how funny that sounds)....I am just glad he is gone....he represents the worst in Howie
Joegrane
I agree with another member who suggested it was Pederson who was desperate for Daniels to help him teach his offense.

We are looking at this in hind sight. Who expected CW from a little school to be so mentally sharp so soon? Most people thought he'd need at least 2/3 year behind Daniels.

The assumption was that Bradford would be traded; however that did not happen until somewhat later than expected.

The point now is that CW developed ahead of schedule, maybe with the assistance from the veteran backup. Howie seems to be on his way to cleaning up much of the mess--with help from the Jets or other team.

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 20 2017, 10:00 PM) *
unless there are 2 teams interested in him (I know how funny that sounds)....I am just glad he is gone....he represents the worst in Howie
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Mar 21 2017, 12:26 AM) *
I agree with another member who suggested it was Pederson who was desperate for Daniels to help him teach his offense.

We are looking at this in hind sight. Who expected CW from a little school to be so mentally sharp so soon? Most people thought he'd need at least 2/3 year behind Daniels.

The assumption was that Bradford would be traded; however that did not happen until somewhat later than expected.

The point now is that CW developed ahead of schedule, maybe with the assistance from the veteran backup. Howie seems to be on his way to cleaning up much of the mess--with help from the Jets or other team.


I look at it a little differently. First, I can't agree that most thought it would take 2-3 years behind Daniel. Not in today's NFL. For the assets spent in particular, the expectation was that he would be ready sooner not later. Many wanted him to start right away. Beyond that it shows great weakness in a coach and a GM that they needed a career backup at a ridiculous salary, a record salary for a backup, to teach a guy an offense that they should be teaching him. It is not as if Dabiel has a body of successful work in that offense....he can't get a job!! Also, when they signed Daniel they had not yet traded up to the position to get Wentz (though they likely had the idea germinating after the combine).

There is no way to justify spending that money on a career backup....none. It is a serious stain on a GM who has plenty of issues already and is now in cap hell. He is far from cleaning up his mess......as Mikey pointed out any team he signs with does not have to offer him much.
Rick
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 21 2017, 10:23 AM) *
I look at it a little differently. First, I can't agree that most thought it would take 2-3 years behind Daniel. Not in today's NFL. For the assets spent in particular, the expectation was that he would be ready sooner not later. Many wanted him to start right away. Beyond that it shows great weakness in a coach and a GM that they needed a career backup at a ridiculous salary, a record salary for a backup, to teach a guy an offense that they should be teaching him. It is not as if Dabiel has a body of successful work in that offense....he can't get a job!! Also, when they signed Daniel they had not yet traded up to the position to get Wentz (though they likely had the idea germinating after the combine).

There is no way to justify spending that money on a career backup....none. It is a serious stain on a GM who has plenty of issues already and is now in cap hell. He is far from cleaning up his mess......as Mikey pointed out any team he signs with does not have to offer him much.

CW wasn't even supposed to dress for a game his whole first year. They absolutely were thinking a year or two before he was going to be ready. I think they saw him in camp and were impressed then got a great offer for Bradford and they switched gears.

I still think it was absolutely ridiculous for them to pay Daniels what they did based on his (lack of) experience and the fact that he was going to be the backup. That was horrible planning.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Rick @ Mar 21 2017, 11:09 AM) *
CW wasn't even supposed to dress for a game his whole first year. They absolutely were thinking a year or two before he was going to be ready. I think they saw him in camp and were impressed then got a great offer for Bradford and they switched gears.

I still think it was absolutely ridiculous for them to pay Daniels what they did based on his (lack of) experience and the fact that he was going to be the backup. That was horrible planning.


While I agree there was no clear cut plan to start him in year one there was certainly no plan on him not dressing, that is ludicrous. That being said, regardless of what their plan was for his evolution, there is no justifiable excuse for paying any player with Daniel's resume 7 million per....totally inexcusable. For any reason.

Beyond that, in today's NFL, you don't draft a guy in the top 5 with the idea that he won't play for 2-3 years, you just don't particularly when you don't have a guy in front of him who is a stud.
Phits
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 21 2017, 01:02 PM) *
Beyond that, in today's NFL, you don't draft a guy in the top 5 with the idea that he won't play for 2-3 years, you just don't particularly when you don't have a guy in front of him who is a stud.

Why not?
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Phits @ Mar 21 2017, 06:27 PM) *
Why not?


Because the nature of the league has changed even from the time since Rodgers was drafted. Your first round picks are expected to play and at QB they sometimes get a year to learn...sometimes...

Lets look at the numbers....

Of the 31 players taken in the first round last year
26 started at least one game
of the other 5?
William Jackson tore a pectoral muscle
Doctson got hurt early
Rankins got hurt
Only 2 players in the entire class did not start a game.

in 2015?
not one player has not started a game
Kevin White was hurt
Perriman was hurt
Almost every player taken has seen extensive playing time either starting or playing significant time.
Dante Folwer tore his ACL
Oqbuehi was IR'd
24 of the 32 started at least 1 game as rookies
Picks 1 and 2 were QBs who started as rookies

You need first round picks to see the field as soon as possible.....those are picks you can't afford to miss.
Rick
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 21 2017, 02:02 PM) *
While I agree there was no clear cut plan to start him in year one there was certainly no plan on him not dressing, that is ludicrous. That being said, regardless of what their plan was for his evolution, there is no justifiable excuse for paying any player with Daniel's resume 7 million per....totally inexcusable. For any reason.

Beyond that, in today's NFL, you don't draft a guy in the top 5 with the idea that he won't play for 2-3 years, you just don't particularly when you don't have a guy in front of him who is a stud.

Well, whether you want to believe it or not, the Eagles were saying just that--CW wasn't going to dress for the first season. I thought it was crazy at the time but they did say it.
nephillymike
Yo people,

I took it as Joe was saying that Wentz would sit two thirds of the year, not two or three years.

2/3 is not 2-3.

The 2/3 was very reasonable, no?

Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 21 2017, 09:12 PM) *
Yo people,

I took it as Joe was saying that Wentz would sit two thirds of the year, not two or three years.

2/3 is not 2-3.

The 2/3 was very reasonable, no?


Yes..if that was the case I apologize...that would be reasonable.....I misread his post. It does not lessen the stupidity of the Daniel contract but I think that was the expectation of most.

I din't like the Daniel contract at the time and I realize the abject stupidity of it more every day. It is especially grating with our current cap space...something predicted at the time but still amazingly poor GMing.
Joegrane
Yes I was saying two-thirds of a year, similar to the number of games D Mac sat while Pedey was the starter.

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 21 2017, 08:36 PM) *
Yes..if that was the case I apologize...that would be reasonable.....I misread his post. It does not lessen the stupidity of the Daniel contract but I think that was the expectation of most.

I din't like the Daniel contract at the time and I realize the abject stupidity of it more every day. It is especially grating with our current cap space...something predicted at the time but still amazingly poor GMing.

nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 21 2017, 08:36 PM) *
Yes..if that was the case I apologize...that would be reasonable.....I misread his post. It does not lessen the stupidity of the Daniel contract but I think that was the expectation of most.

I din't like the Daniel contract at the time and I realize the abject stupidity of it more every day. It is especially grating with our current cap space...something predicted at the time but still amazingly poor GMing.


Sometimes I wonder about Howie. There is no way anyone was paying near the amounts that they gave Daniel and Curry. I think he negotiates against himself.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 21 2017, 10:06 PM) *
Sometimes I wonder about Howie. There is no way anyone was paying near the amounts that they gave Daniel and Curry. I think he negotiates against himself.


The Curry contract I can almost see some justification. While it was high he likely still would have gotten decent money somewhere. The Daniel contract was basically admitting that Pederson and his staff were nowhere near equipped to coach up a rookie QB which is damning on several levels. Add to it there was no one else who would pay Daniel that kind of money and you have a serious error in judgement by a guy who has the keys to the castle.
Zero
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 21 2017, 10:31 PM) *
The Curry contract I can almost see some justification. While it was high he likely still would have gotten decent money somewhere. The Daniel contract was basically admitting that Pederson and his staff were nowhere near equipped to coach up a rookie QB which is damning on several levels. Add to it there was no one else who would pay Daniel that kind of money and you have a serious error in judgement by a guy who has the keys to the castle.

I think this is a bit harsh. It's not that he didn't overpay for Daniel, but they knew they had a rookie, unproven HC and probably knew they wanted to do what they could to draft their franchise QB. They've explained their thinking about building the team "the right way" starting with the QB, and if they believed there was a chance of drafting Wentz I can understand overreacting to be sure both rookies had the best chance for success.

I'm sure Pederson had say in the hiring and Daniel probably thought he was starting material. With Bradford's history he probably thought he'd be the starter. I wouldn't be surprised if KC was trying to keep him so I doubt Roseman was bidding against himself which would explain low starter pay. We don't know what Bradford was like in the QB meetings and maybe they thought their rookie needed a better example for that. In fact, there's a lot we don't know other than the Eagles paid a lot of money and cap space for a player that didn't do much on the field.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 22 2017, 06:04 AM) *
I think this is a bit harsh. It's not that he didn't overpay for Daniel, but they knew they had a rookie, unproven HC and probably knew they wanted to do what they could to draft their franchise QB. They've explained their thinking about building the team "the right way" starting with the QB, and if they believed there was a chance of drafting Wentz I can understand overreacting to be sure both rookies had the best chance for success.

I'm sure Pederson had say in the hiring and Daniel probably thought he was starting material. With Bradford's history he probably thought he'd be the starter. I wouldn't be surprised if KC was trying to keep him so I doubt Roseman was bidding against himself which would explain low starter pay. We don't know what Bradford was like in the QB meetings and maybe they thought their rookie needed a better example for that. In fact, there's a lot we don't know other than the Eagles paid a lot of money and cap space for a player that didn't do much on the field.


I don't think it is harsh at all. If you feel you need to pay a career backup 7 million a year to "coach" up your rookie than you should be fired for hiring the former QB you hired to be your coach. They had a staff full of QB coaching talent, giving a ridiculous contract to a guy who can't sniff a starting job is a clear display of insecurity and a huge waste of resources.
Daniel was clearly not a better option than Bradford, a fact obviated in camp and nothing in his past indicated he could be. There really is now scenario where one could mount a justifiable argument thet they "had" to have him.
There were other options, other veteran QBs who had actually played in real games a lot, that could mentor the kid.
If Pederson was involved than a good GM, no, even a mediocre GM would have said "ok but we are not paying him 7 million per". No one in their right mind does something so damn dumb, Cleveland does something like that.
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.