One of the more suprising things this season has been the poor play of the defense, secondary especially. They were gouged by the run against the Falcons (w/o Trotter) and the Broncos, but otherwise they have been pretty good against the run. But the secondary has not been good at all this year.
I think there a couple things that are contributing to the poor play. The first one being that they are on the field for way too many plays. The offense leads the league in 3 and outs and with all the passing they've done this year, they aren't taking any time off the clock.
Another thing is the front four, they are killing the secondary. The front four can not get any pressure on their own, thus hanging the secondary out to dry. The only time that JJ can get pressure is through the blitz, but even the blitzes are getting picked up.
I also think that the secondary, Lito and Lewis in general, have gotten a little high on themselves this year. Lito is constantly baiting the qb in hopes of getting picks but it's back firing on him. Michael Lewis is being made to look silly when he's trying to cover somebody, and he even admits that their head's are too big.
As far as personnel goes, that's the most confusing, this is basically the same lineup that started the Super Bowl last year, with 2 exceptions, Burgess and Simon. And seeing that the majority of the problems are with the front four, you have to admit that they miss these guys.
The bottom line is, we are back to Eagles football 2001-2003 here. They need good defense to force turnovers and get good field position with the offense maximizing what the defense gets them. The defense needs to pick up the play if there is any chance of the Eagles making a run at the playoffs or even the division.
You hit the nail on the head w/the 3 & outs. This begs the same point everyone talks about the running game. Our D is good and not our weakness. Look what they did vs L.T. Teams will score, but you have to give the D a breather sometimes, not to mention capitalize on turn-overs. AR needs to get the playcalling better early in games. We need early points for confidence, that's probably the bottom line.
Quote from: Sun_Mo on November 14, 2005, 11:19:04 AM
Another thing is the front four, they are killing the secondary. The front four can not get any pressure on their own, thus hanging the secondary out to dry. The only time that JJ can get pressure is through the blitz, but even the blitzes are getting picked up.
As far as personnel goes, that's the most confusing, this is basically the same lineup that started the Super Bowl last year, with 2 exceptions, Burgess and Simon. And seeing that the majority of the problems are with the front four, you have to admit that they miss these guys.
you answered your own question.
its been really a lack of consistency...one game they dominate..the next they can't stop anything. it def. has to do with the offense and always being out on the field will just turn a good defense into a bad one quick. and lito has been exposed this year...he really needs to cover better and tackle better. big disappointment so far. other defensive slackers, have been Adams, Jones and Lewis IMO.
Trotter has been a no show for the defense too in the last 2 games. Where has he been and where is that energy?
Lito and Mike Lewis thought a little too highly of themselves after the Pro-Bowl berths last year, IMO.
They need a smack back to reality.
Mike and Dhani better be ready to shut Witten down tonight and Lito better not try to "let me bait this here QB and watch Terry Glenn blow right on by me".
Good thing for the Eagles is that Flozell Adams is hurt in Dallas and they've been starting Torrin Tucker.
And I know Kearse had troubles with the Pettitti/Witten/Campbell rotation last time, but I think he has a good game tonight.
Payton will go max-protect again likely though so the secondary better be up to task.,
Quote from: mhunt on November 14, 2005, 11:33:59 AM
Quote from: Sun_Mo on November 14, 2005, 11:19:04 AM
Another thing is the front four, they are killing the secondary. The front four can not get any pressure on their own, thus hanging the secondary out to dry. The only time that JJ can get pressure is through the blitz, but even the blitzes are getting picked up.
As far as personnel goes, that's the most confusing, this is basically the same lineup that started the Super Bowl last year, with 2 exceptions, Burgess and Simon. And seeing that the majority of the problems are with the front four, you have to admit that they miss these guys.
you answered your own question.
The team was banking on McDougal even though he had shown that he sucked ass. If he was there you still be complaining about the front 4.
I just really hope McCoy can get on the field sooner than later. I'm not too fond of the LBs.
If these shteinheads miss tackles like they did last week I'm going to take a long squirty shtein in a gladlock bag and mail it to the novacare complex. farging weak ass, arm-tackling, nancies.
ST have been poor as well.
It's much easier playing defense when the opposing team is pinned back in their own territory.
good article from Reuben..
QuoteEagles defense hits Kryptonite
By REUBEN FRANK
phillyBurbs.com
PHILADELPHIA — It's gone from a strength to a weakness.
Last year, the Eagles sent three of their four defensive backs to the Pro Bowl, and the one who didn't go was named to one all-pro team.
This year, the Eagles are 23rd-best in the NFL in pass defense and have already allowed 20 touchdown passes, most since 1999 and only four fewer than they allowed in 2000 and 2001 combined.
What happened? Where did it all go wrong defensively for the Eagles? How did a Super Bowl pass defense turn into this?
"It's a combination of things," defensive coordinator Jim Johnson said yesterday. "I wish I had an easy answer. I hate to make a bunch of excuses, but that's what I find myself doing.
"It's something we have to look at in the end of the season and see why this is happening."
Pass pressure has been lame. Coverage has been sporadic. Third down has been a disaster. And the Eagles in one year have gone from one of the most dominant pass defenses in the league to one of the worst.
"We've got to find guys who are going to rush the passer," Johnson said. ... It's something we have to continue to work on. We have to evaluate it in the offseason and get better. There's no easy answer. I wish there was."
Only five teams — the 49ers (26), Titans (26), Rams (24), Chiefs (23) and Patriots (22) — have allowed more touchdown passes than the Eagles. The Eagles are 25th in total defense, 23rd in passing defense, 23rd in sacks and 27rd in yards per pass play.
And injuries can't be an excuse. The Eagles have been devastated on offense, but only cornerback Lito Sheppard and backup tackle Paul Grasmanis have been lost for the season on defense.
There's certainly a chance that when the Pro Bowl teams come out the defense won't be represented at all for the first time since 1998.
Last year, they had five.
Johnson suspects the root of the problem is the nearly constant lack of pass pressure. The Eagles have gotten just 121/2 sacks from their defensive ends, 61/2 from Jevon Kearse, 5.0 from rookie Trent Cole and one from Ndukwe Kalu.
Kearse has 14 sacks in 27 games as an Eagle, 51/2 in two games. That means he has 81/2 in the 26 other games. At $7.8 million per year.
"I know he's frustrated," Johnson said. "The effort is there. He's such a speed rusher and maybe he needs a couple different moves."
Only six teams that play a 4-3 front have recorded fewer sacks this year out of their defensive linemen. Last year, the Eagles ranked second in the NFL in sacks.
The Eagles have been unable to take quarterbacks out of their comfort zone and it's led to big play after big play. Quarterbacks are averaging 7.3 yards per pass attempt against the Eagles, the highest figure against the Eagles in 17 years and fourth-worst in the NFL. Only the 49ers (8.0), Texans (7.7) and Patriots (7.5) have allowed more yards per pass play.
After ranking among the top seven in the NFL in scoring defense five straight years, the Eagles are now 25th.
Johnson said defensive tackle Darwin Walker, struggling through a miserable season, will be back in the starting lineup opposite rookie Mike Patterson when the Eagles and Rams meet at 1 p.m. Sunday at the Edward Jones Dome in St. Louis in a battle of 5-8 teams.
Johnson benched Walker for Sam Rayburn in the Giants game and said Walker played better.
"One of the reasons I didn't start him was to light a fire a little bit and he came through ... and played pretty good," Johnson said. "There are a lot of things that happen for a defensive tackle, but his production has decreased and so has Sam's. I'm sure they're disappointed. We are too. ... We are not getting inside pressure like we have in the past."
For a while, Cole was getting great pressure on the quarterback and that was helping Kearse. But the last few weeks, that hasn't happened and neither has a sack since the first Giants game.
Johnson said teams are still double-teaming Kearse, which should open things up for Cole.
"You would think so," Johnson said.
This is the first time since September of 2003 Eagles defensive ends have gone three straight games without a sack. Eagles castoff Derrick Burgess has 13 for the Raiders, more than all Eagles defensive ends and only 51/2 fewer than all Eagles defensive linemen.
What happens next?
"Right now, I'm thinking about getting ready for the Rams and that's all I'm focused on," Johnson said. "I don't want to think about the offseason right now."
*Right tackle Jon Runyan (knee) was the only player to miss practice. But he's expected to play in his 142nd consecutive game Sunday.
dude...i thought we already established that they don't miss burgess..............or simon.............or reese.
jeesh.
Kearse is stealing money. I think Brasher needs to retire and get some new blood in the defensive coaching staff.
Simon has been 'meh' for the Colts. This team misses Burgess infinitely more than Simon. Oh well.
Quote from: mhunt on December 16, 2005, 11:45:31 AM
dude...i thought we already established that they don't miss burgess..............or simon.............or reese.
jeesh.
I don't think anybody can or will debate that. The point was, is, and forever will be that we could not pay those guys what they wanted.
End of story.
The point was, is, and forever will be that we could not pay those guys what they wanted
absolutely not true
simon could have made his 5 mil for this year and would have immediately come off the books at the end of the season... even after signing westbrook and akers birds are more than 5 mil over the cap
burgess at the time seemed to have been overpaid..contract doesnt look so bad now tho...can you rip the birds for not keeping him...probably not...but they definitely could have kept him if they wanted to...its tough decisions like these that are the difference between having a good franchise and the gold standard
I think the better way to say it is... at the time, neither contract was worth giving. Obviously, the Eagles were in a financial position where they could have signed those guys, but Burgess's contract was way too rich compared to his extensive injury history and spotty production and Simon was out of shape not going to be worth $5 million. Guess what? They were 1 for 2 on that. Only reason you could say letting Simon go was a mistake is that our remaining DT group has been weak sauce. Simon may be a starter in Indy, but he's not even one of their best two DT's... and he's still out of shape.
you continue to miss the point on simon...he would have made 5 mil for one year...THIS year...the same year that the eagles have more than 5 mil worth of cap money rotting in jeffery luries shoebox
thus there was absolutely no reason to not sign him for this year
Quote from: ice grillin you on December 16, 2005, 03:11:42 PM
thus there was absolutely no reason to not sign him for this year
correction: there was absolutely no reason
for him not to sign
him for this year.
how long was the tag on him where he could have signed and made $5M for gaining weight?
correction: there was absolutely no reason for him to not sign him for this year.
sure there was...he instead wanted the long term contract he ended up getting..but the bottom line was he had no control over it...he could have sat out the year or he could have played and made 5 mil...and gotten his long term johnson in the offseason when he would have become an UFA
Quote from: ice grillin you on December 16, 2005, 03:11:42 PM
you continue to miss the point on simon...he would have made 5 mil for one year...THIS year...the same year that the eagles have more than 5 mil worth of cap money rotting in jeffery luries shoebox
thus there was absolutely no reason to not sign him for this year
I cannot belive we are still having this argument.
IGY, HE NEVER SIGNED THE DEAL!!!
HE DIDN'T SIGN IT!
HE DIDN'T WANT THE $5 MILL DEAL!
Christ.
Quote from: ice grillin you on December 16, 2005, 03:17:08 PM
sure there was...he instead wanted the long term contract he ended up getting..
Not really. His contract has a huge option bonus next year which the Colts will likely not give him.
There was
a reason for the Eagles not to pay him. They felt that the 4-man rotation of Walker, Thomas, Patterson, and Rayburn was looking good in pre-season and deserved to play. Oh well.
Quote from: methdeez on December 16, 2005, 03:33:26 PM
Quote from: ice grillin you on December 16, 2005, 03:11:42 PM
you continue to miss the point on simon...he would have made 5 mil for one year...THIS year...the same year that the eagles have more than 5 mil worth of cap money rotting in jeffery luries shoebox
thus there was absolutely no reason to not sign him for this year
I cannot belive we are still having this argument.
IGY, HE NEVER SIGNED THE DEAL!!!
HE DIDN'T SIGN IT!
HE DIDN'T WANT THE $5 MILL DEAL!
Christ.
it was pretty well known he was going to sign the tender after the last pre-season game. but if you really think he was going to sit home and not play this year i can't really help you with that.
it was pretty well known he was going to sign the tender after the last pre-season game. but if you really think he was going to sit home and not play this year i can't really help you with that
exactly
BUT
lets for fun say that he would have stuck to his guns and sat out the whole year...how is that any different than what ended up happening...
Everyone acts like Cory was begging for some deal and that the Eagles refused to sign him. He refused $6 mill a year, refused to come to work and begged to be released.
What makes you think we could have gotten him to play for $6 mill a year? That's a total assumption. Who knows what his dumb ass would have done, or how long he would have sat out.
The bottom line is to attack the Eagles for not paying him $6 mill a year is so ass-backwards it would be funny if I hadn't heard it 100 times.
The wanted to give him $6 Mill! They asked him multiple times to take thier money!
And he wouldn't!
Why do you knuckleheads think that Banner secretly wanted to keep $6 million in his pocket?
Quote from: methdeez on December 16, 2005, 04:03:55 PM
Everyone acts like Cory was begging for some deal and that the Eagles refused to sign him. He refused $6 mill a year, refused to come to work and begged to be released.
What makes you think we could have gotten him to play for $6 mill a year? That's a total assumption. Who knows what his dumb ass would have done, or how long he would have sat out.
The bottom line is to attack the Eagles for not paying him $6 mill a year is so ass-backwards it would be funny if I hadn't heard it 100 times.
The wanted to give him $6 Mill! They asked him multiple times to take thier money!
And he wouldn't!
Why do you knuckleheads think that Banner secretly wanted to keep $6 million in his pocket?
it's not about the money, it's about letting a player they had under their control walk away and their defense was worse off for it.
Quote from: Sun_Mo on December 16, 2005, 03:45:28 PM
Quote from: methdeez on December 16, 2005, 03:33:26 PM
Quote from: ice grillin you on December 16, 2005, 03:11:42 PM
you continue to miss the point on simon...he would have made 5 mil for one year...THIS year...the same year that the eagles have more than 5 mil worth of cap money rotting in jeffery luries shoebox
thus there was absolutely no reason to not sign him for this year
I cannot belive we are still having this argument.
IGY, HE NEVER SIGNED THE DEAL!!!
HE DIDN'T SIGN IT!
HE DIDN'T WANT THE $5 MILL DEAL!
Christ.
it was pretty well known he was going to sign the tender after the last pre-season game. but if you really think he was going to sit home and not play this year i can't really help you with that.
yeah, you want all your oversized undershape defensive linemen to not get any practice time before the season starts.
if he intended to sign it, he should have signed it, period. end of story...the fact that he wanted to wait until after the last preseason game just goes to show how much will and dedication he had to his team at the time.
if nothing was going to change one way or the other, why didnt he sign it right away?
he never had any intention of signing it, or signing long term with the eagles. he got his way.
Quote from: Wingspan on December 16, 2005, 04:07:30 PM
he never had any intention of signing it, or signing long term with the eagles. he got his way.
oh ok, so he would've just stopped playing football then? good to know you have that information.
like IGY said, even in the unrealistic event that Simon did sit out the year, what's the difference to the team than what happened this year?
Financially, I guess Corey could have been signed for this year. But realistically, how much a difference would it have made? It's real easy to sit here and comment on the ineptitude of our DT's and think that the guy who we "let get away" would have changed things. Not Burgess nor Simon nor Reese would change what is going on right now. The problems with this defense go a whole lot deeper than the 2 or 3 guys we let go. Kearse is overpaid; Our LB's are undersized; our secondary has gotten cocky, etc...
I'm tired of people thinking Corey was worth the money because Indy is 13-0, and their D has become a respectable unit.
News flash: Indy would be 13-0 without him. Bob Sanders, Mike Doss, Larry Tripplett, Dwight Freeney, etc...These guys are the reason the Colts D has improved; Doughboy has little to do with it.
Quote from: Die-Hard on December 16, 2005, 04:38:11 PM
News flash: Indy would be 13-0 without him. Bob Sanders, Mike Doss, Larry Tripplett, Dwight Freeney, etc...These guys are the reason the Colts D has improved; Doughboy has little to do with it.
If you keep making sense like this, people are going to stop thinking you're insane. Do you really want that?
but it's not even about what the guys are doing with their new teams, i would even say that when people where sucking off the Eagles FO because Trotter was awful in Washington. it's not about what they are doing somewhere else, it's about who's in their place here. a DT line rotation of Walker, Thomas, Rayburn, and Patterson has not gotten the job done. it's my opinion that had Simon been in that rotation they would've been better.
but DH is right about the defense, it's more than the line, the OLBs are horrible and need to be upgraded.
Financially, I guess Corey could have been signed for this year. But realistically, how much a difference would it have made?
little if any...once mcnabb got the hernia in the atlanta game that was it for the team
but at the time it was a terrible move...when youre a team about to make a superbowl run you dont let your best player at a position walk for free...especially when you could have had him for essentially nothing
so yes looking back on everything thats happened its obvious that letting corey go didnt mean anything...but why does everyone look back on that now and say the birds made the right move...but when they look back on the burgess situation its "well he wanted too much money"...cant have it both ways
Quote from: JailBird-man on November 14, 2005, 11:26:07 AM
You hit the nail on the head w/the 3 & outs. This begs the same point everyone talks about the running game. Our D is good and not our weakness. Look what they did vs L.T. Teams will score, but you have to give the D a breather sometimes, not to mention capitalize on turn-overs. AR needs to get the playcalling better early in games. We need early points for confidence, that's probably the bottom line.
Bull shtein!!
They need to get themselves off the goddamn field. There are nowhere near enough 3 and outs by our opposition.
Corey was the right decision at the time, so was Burgess. Since then, Burgess has proven that the Eagles made a mistake, and Corey has proven that they didn't.
Neither player has much to do with why the D is playing poorly. The LBs suck, except for Trotter, who is generally good against the run, but sucks against the pass. Dawk is slowing down with age. Lewis has peaked. Lito let his fame get into his head, and played below his skills. The line sucks. The offense has offered no support, often placing the whole game on the D. And teams have figured out JJ's D. His blitzes aren't surprising people, and they are the only tool he has in his shed. The D needs a big shake up.
Bring in a guy like Will Witherspoon, and we'll see what a difference he can make. Last I checked, LB's are supposed to be able to run sideline to sideline. Adams and Jones do not. I believe it all starts with the LB's and it's time to buck this farging trend that AR has put into place that he won't pay for a good one.
Grab Witherspoon, draft a BIG DE, add one more solid DT, and this D will look a lot more like 04's and a lot less like 99's.
Or don't. Whatever.
I cannot believe some of yall are still bellyaching over Corey Simon's departure.
1. Even if he was signed this year he was leaving after the season. Heckert alluded to that during his interview the other day.
2. Simon's absence is not the difference in 5-8 to 9-4. If he was here the record would be no different. The problems are bigger than Simon not being here.
3. Simon no longer is worth a shtein. He's a younger version of Hollis Thomas now.
But hey...don't let me stop the pity party over Burgess and Simon. Carry on....
You are on the mark Die Hard - 3 great DEs in this draft - Witherspoon would be great fit and at DT Larry Triplett be just fine.
Things we can do on O to to keep the chain moving and D rested
Add Davenport a big back with some skills and west coast knowledge - and get if lucky and move up in 2nd the TE Pope - for our 2 te sets he is going to be a monster 6/7 265 runs 40 in 4.55
This team can turn around very very fast - I think it will - Well hope the front office does what it can for their fans.
Can we talk about Corey Simon some more? I hear he's fat. I hear we should have kept him. But I also hear that we shouldn't have kept him. It's all very riveting.
Did you hear about when the number fell off his jersey? Someone said he ate it. That was funny.
if anyone questions what impact a good, fast OLB can have, just check out Sean Merriman yesterday versus the Colts, he was awesome. the Eagles need more like him, and less like the bow-tie queer.
Quote from: Sun_Mo on December 19, 2005, 04:29:41 PM
if anyone questions what impact a good, fast OLB can have, just check out Sean Merriman yesterday versus the Colts, he was awesome. the Eagles need more like him, and less like the bow-tie queer.
Just think...He could have been a Giant.
He should've been a Lion...if Matt Millen wasn't such a dumbass.
And Dallas had a shot at him at #11 too, I thought he had a shot to go there. It was between him and Ware and they chose Ware obviously. He was pissed at Dallas for "lying" to him.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on December 19, 2005, 05:03:47 PM
He was pissed at Dallas for "lying" to him.
That seems to be a reccurring thing with Dallas....Sheldon, Ray Rhodes, Merriman, etc...
he really should have been a titan...pac man jones????
Come on, that's revisionist history. Merriman had HUGE attitude problems, and on top of that he had the Postons as his agent. Look how long it took SD to get him under contract. Sure he's playing well now, but there were risks.
merriman did not have attitude problems...he just took a stance that he wanted more money than was slotted to him as he believed he was worth top 5 money...and guess what...he was right
No, he had attitude problems at Maryland, IIRC.
he really didnt...in fact he was the consumate team player and one of the best leaders they ever had...much like dqwell jackson now
merriman was labeled a malcontent after the draft when he puffed his chest out and said he wouldnt sign for number 11 money because he was better than that
the reason he dropped was because many pp people thought he might be a twenner
whether it's is true or not we may never know, but there were definitely rumors of Merriman being a character issue player leading up to the draft. In fact, that was the major story of why the Cowturds didnt select him. Merriman dumped his agent right after the draft and signed with the Postons and then refused to work out with the Chargers because of the injury clause in his contract. Those issues also were played up.
im telling you i followed him for four years in college...he was/is a god at umd...all his supposed problems were related to the draft and the agent situation you mentioned
im not disagreeing with that, but those issues happened after the draft... which doesnt explain the Cowturds staying away from him.
Quote from: MURP on December 20, 2005, 11:03:18 AM
which doesnt explain the Cowturds staying away from him.
They gave him a piss test and he passed.
touche
which doesnt explain the Cowturds staying away from him.
especially so since they drafted an undersized player anyway...merriman showed all the flashes of becoming a superstar...the only reason not to have taken him top 5 was a huge position need or being fearful of his tweenerism
Quote from: Sgt PSN on December 20, 2005, 11:04:59 AM
Quote from: MURP on December 20, 2005, 11:03:18 AM
which doesnt explain the Cowturds staying away from him.
They gave him a piss test and he passed.
:-D :-D :-D
Im happy the Cowboys lied to Sheldon, hes my 2nd fav Eagle.
Die Hard makes some good points though. Bringing in a WIL like Spoon who can run would be great. Adding a DE/DT though the draft and FA needs to be done too.
SAM should be upgraded but if the top 3 are done, the position would look better based on pressure. Thornton is a good fix though. He has good size and speed.
Quote from: StevieLeftCollege on December 23, 2005, 04:03:23 PM
SAM should be upgraded but if the top 3 are done, the position would look better based on pressure.
I'm no fan of Dhani, but if we get Spoon I can live with Trot, Spoon, and Jones. Having a guy that can run side to side would make a world of difference. But the front 4 needs to be stepped up too. Darren Howard and/or Larry Triplett would do.
Quote from: Die-Hard on December 24, 2005, 03:47:57 PM
Quote from: StevieLeftCollege on December 23, 2005, 04:03:23 PM
SAM should be upgraded but if the top 3 are done, the position would look better based on pressure.
I'm no fan of Dhani, but if we get Spoon I can live with Trot, Spoon, and Jones. Having a guy that can run side to side would make a world of difference. But the front 4 needs to be stepped up too. Darren Howard and/or Larry Triplett would do.
Agreed. A fast WIL would make the SAM look better.
The DL needs alot of help in the form of FA and the draft.
darren howard is done
I agree with that. I either want Van Den Bosch, Abraham or in the draft Williams or Kiwanuka. One of those 4 guys I will be very happy with. I'm not sure if Van Den Bosch is a one year wonder so I might stay away.
i think after the eagles experience with free agents(owens,kearse)you guys are pretty much done spending anymore of mr luries money.your defense sucks this year for 2 very simple reasons.first,on the field way too much,and because you are playing from behind alot,its alot tougher to blitz
Quote from: dmek25 on December 28, 2005, 10:08:55 AM
i think after the eagles experience with free agents(owens,kearse)you guys are pretty much done spending anymore of mr luries money.your defense sucks this year for 2 very simple reasons.first,on the field way too much,and because you are playing from behind alot,its alot tougher to blitz
You write like a Korean teenager. What do you do for a living?
try to figure out if the eagles window is closing or already closed as you guys drift back to being the same old eagles that sucked forever
Ah right, an unemployed member of the Dead Tree Crew. Well, that explains that.
this would help....
QuoteJets | Abraham's future with team may be in doubt
Thu, 29 Dec 2005 09:02:11 -0800
Mark Cannizzaro, of the New York Post, reports there are many within the New York Jets organization that would like to lock up DE John Abraham to a long-term contract. However, according to a highly placed NFL source familiar with the thinking of the Jets brass and who spoke only on the condition of anonymity, Jets owner Woody Johnson is "reluctant" to dole out a huge signing bonus to Abraham. If that is true, Abraham may find himself looking for a new team in 2006. Now the question facing the Jets is this: Do they think enough of Abraham to sign him for the long term, do they franchise him again and pay him $8 million for next season, or do they use him as trade bait to obtain a veteran quarterback or a better position in the draft? Abraham said he's prepared for all three scenarios.
could you imagine a DE rotation of Abraham, Kearse, Cole, and ??? (McDougle i guess)
3rd downs, you could rush Abraham and Cole at opposite ends and move Kearse to Joker and send him from whatever position :drool
Trade McMahon for Abraham!
That would be sweet. However, I can't see them tying up that much dough in 2 DEs.
Quote from: MadMarchHare on December 29, 2005, 02:42:08 PM
That would be sweet. However, I can't see them tying up that much dough in 2 DEs.
yeah, i agree. but it's a good wet dream
Quote from: MadMarchHare on December 29, 2005, 02:42:08 PM
That would be sweet. However, I can't see them tying up that much dough in 2 DEs.
They wouldn't really be tying that much up, because Kearse is gone after 2006.
Kearse could be gone right now and nobody would even notice.
Quote from: General_Failure on December 29, 2005, 05:30:09 PM
Kearse could be gone right now and nobody would even notice.
opposing tackles would notice when they actually had to block an inside move.
They'd probably notice whatever undersized DE replaces him is 50 pounds heavier too.
Quote from: General_Failure on December 29, 2005, 05:30:09 PM
Kearse could be gone right now and nobody would even notice.
Kearse
is gone. Been gone for the past month. The fact that you didn't even notice proves your point though. Congratulations.
Quote from: FFatPatt on December 29, 2005, 03:19:59 PM
Quote from: MadMarchHare on December 29, 2005, 02:42:08 PM
That would be sweet. However, I can't see them tying up that much dough in 2 DEs.
They wouldn't really be tying that much up, because Kearse is gone after 2006.
Not a chance, man. He's got too much dead money to be cut loose...
Quote2006: $4,200,000 (2.075 mil base salary+2 mil proration+125K workout bonus; $8,000,000 dead money if cut)
2007: $7,325,000 (5.2 mil base salary+2 mil proration+125K workout bonus; $6,000,000 dead money if cut)
2008: $8,585,000 (6.46 mil base salary+2 mil proration+125K workout bonus; $4,000,000 dead money if cut)
2009: $9,720,000 (7.72 mil base salary+2 mil proration; $2,000,000 dead money if cut)
2010: $8,980,000 (base salary)
2011: $10,240,000 (base salary)
Quote from: EagleFeva on December 30, 2005, 05:45:23 AM
Quote from: General_Failure on December 29, 2005, 05:30:09 PM
Kearse could be gone right now and nobody would even notice.
Kearse is gone. Been gone for the past month. The fact that you didn't even notice proves your point though. Congratulations.
I was going to go there, but it's too much effort without enough payoff. I see you're a gambler though. :)
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on December 30, 2005, 08:29:18 AM
Quote from: FFatPatt on December 29, 2005, 03:19:59 PM
They wouldn't really be tying that much up, because Kearse is gone after 2006.
Not a chance, man. He's got too much dead money to be cut loose...
Quote2006: $4,200,000 (2.075 mil base salary+2 mil proration+125K workout bonus; $8,000,000 dead money if cut)
2007: $7,325,000 (5.2 mil base salary+2 mil proration+125K workout bonus; $6,000,000 dead money if cut)
2008: $8,585,000 (6.46 mil base salary+2 mil proration+125K workout bonus; $4,000,000 dead money if cut)
2009: $9,720,000 (7.72 mil base salary+2 mil proration; $2,000,000 dead money if cut)
2010: $8,980,000 (base salary)
2011: $10,240,000 (base salary)
Surely ye jest, Phreakster.
2007, as of now, is an uncapped year. Even once the new CBA is agreed to, it is unlikely to be nearly as restrictive a cap as in years past. Also, 2007 is the first year Kearse would cost the team less in cap room to cut him than keep him. And if that's not enough, you're probably not factoring in that his initial signing bonus was probably partially structured as a roster bonus, so the dead money hits are likely to be smaller than your amounts.
I still say he's gone after 2006, unless he has an absolute monster year in 2006... which I doubt.
Well, we'll see. You very well could be right about the new CBA factoring into the decision. But I think he'll be here for a few more years.
I got the numbers from this site (http://www.geocities.com/eaglescap/) and he's been as accurate as anyone I've seen on the net so far.
Kearse did get a RB but it was $4M and paid in 2004. He had a $12M SB on top of the $4M RB.
Whats wrong with the defense? attitude. Too many guys on the D are lackadaisical. Whatever "nasty" attitude they were striving for in training camp didnt work. Trotter and Dawkins have the right tude, but that isnt enough. Clearly Lewis and Sheppard got a big head and didnt prepare in the offseason the way a pro bowl caliber player prepares. Players like Hollis, Rayburn, Walker, Dhani, Adams etc only get fired up when they make a play, which is few and far between. You could see this right off the bat in Atlanta. Hopefully this season was a reality check for these guys. You cant just show up and expect to have a great defense. You have to work for it starting in the offseason. I expect Jim Johnson to filter out the players who dont have the necessary work ethic this offseason and get some guys in who do have it.
McDougle can't wait to come back and average 1 sack per year (http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/99-01032006-592175.html) :yay
Quote from: MURP on December 30, 2005, 11:11:35 PM
Whats wrong with the defense? attitude. Too many guys on the D are lackadaisical. Whatever "nasty" attitude they were striving for in training camp didnt work. Trotter and Dawkins have the right tude, but that isnt enough. Clearly Lewis and Sheppard got a big head and didnt prepare in the offseason the way a pro bowl caliber player prepares. Players like Hollis, Rayburn, Walker, Dhani, Adams etc only get fired up when they make a play, which is few and far between. You could see this right off the bat in Atlanta. Hopefully this season was a reality check for these guys. You cant just show up and expect to have a great defense. You have to work for it starting in the offseason. I expect Jim Johnson to filter out the players who dont have the necessary work ethic this offseason and get some guys in who do have it.
Well put Murp. The defense was far from nasty. I still think Trotter spent too much time expressing his love for TO, but I'm biased cause i don't care for him.
http://www.concretefield.com/forum/index.php?topic=14344.msg246309#msg246309