players vs front office

[Rome]

I think the FO should show a little more flexibility, instead of always referring back to the 'spreadsheet'.  It's OK to overpay a little for your own talent...it's OK to throw a carrot to your star WR.

The Eagles have been more than fair with their players but the bottom line is, there's a bottom line financially that has to be reckoned with.

They simply cannot afford to overpay players because if they do, they'll end up like the rest of the dregs of the NFL who've done so in the past.

Teams like San Francisco, Jacksonville, Tennessee & Washington have all spent like drunken sailors and look what that's gotten them in the salary cap era.  I know the Eagles haven't won the big one yet, but in all honesty, I'd rather root for a team with a chance every year than a team who blows its wad in a desperate attempt to get there and that's exactly what would happen if they broke the bank on players.

[StevieLeftCollege]

if you dont agree with westy then i cant fathom a scenario where you would ever side with the player...which is why i threw this topic out there...perhaps someone has one where they would be pro player

and i cant see how you could side with him.

hes got 1.4 on the table right now.  thats more then his rookie contract as a 3rd pick was total.  i dont know the exact figures but 5 years 9-12SB and 25mil seems to be the going number.

i think thats plenty for what he is. 

[StevieLeftCollege]

I think the FO should show a little more flexibility, instead of always referring back to the 'spreadsheet'.  It's OK to overpay a little for your own talent...it's OK to throw a carrot to your star WR.

The Eagles have been more than fair with their players but the bottom line is, there's a bottom line financially that has to be reckoned with.

They simply cannot afford to overpay players because if they do, they'll end up like the rest of the dregs of the NFL who've done so in the past.

Teams like San Francisco, Jacksonville, Tennessee & Washington have all spent like drunken sailors and look what that's gotten them in the salary cap era.  I know the Eagles haven't won the big one yet, but in all honesty, I'd rather root for a team with a chance every year than a team who blows its wad in a desperate attempt to get there and that's exactly what would happen if they broke the bank on players.

100% utah!

ive been happy with the team the past 5 or years, except for a few moments.  i rather have a constant with the team then ups and downs.

[Larry]

I think the FO should show a little more flexibility, instead of always referring back to the 'spreadsheet'.  It's OK to overpay a little for your own talent...it's OK to throw a carrot to your star WR.

The Eagles have been more than fair with their players but the bottom line is, there's a bottom line financially that has to be reckoned with.

They simply cannot afford to overpay players because if they do, they'll end up like the rest of the dregs of the NFL who've done so in the past.

Teams like San Francisco, Jacksonville, Tennessee & Washington have all spent like drunken sailors and look what that's gotten them in the salary cap era.  I know the Eagles haven't won the big one yet, but in all honesty, I'd rather root for a team with a chance every year than a team who blows its wad in a desperate attempt to get there and that's exactly what would happen if they broke the bank on players.

They can afford to pay a player or two above the norm, especially when that player is an essential part of the team.  The key is to identify which players are essentials.

I'll use NE as an example...Ty Law, Damian Woody, not essential, so they were let go.  Brady & Seymour, essential, so they were given big extensions. 

I happen to think Owens & Westbrook are essential to this team's continued success.

[PhillyGirl]

And Westbrook's offer is EXTREMELY fair! Larry, what money would you like thrown at this guy? Seriously?

[Rome]

They pay McNabb well above the norm and they pay Kearse well above the norm.

There's two right there.

As for Owens, he was extremely well-compensated last year.  He also knew when he signed the deal that this year was the one in which his compensation would drop dramatically.  I have no sympathy for him whatsoever in terms of his lust for more money.  He signed the farging deal.  Live up to it like a man and shut your face hole. 

The same goes for Westbrook.  He signed the tender with the understanding that a new deal MIGHT be worked out, but if it wasn't, he agreed to play for the tender amount.

[Larry]

And Westbrook's offer is EXTREMELY fair! Larry, what money would you like thrown at this guy? Seriously?

Well Westbrook doesn't think it's that fair. 

Westbrook's not a stupid guy...he knows many defensive coordinators consider him the most feared weapon of our offense.

As for compensation, I'd give him a deal near or at McAllister's.  On top of that, I'd plan to use Westbrook a lot more often.

And I think that's another issue Westbrook has with his role here...he wants the ball more often (I happen to believe his apparent fragility is overblown).   You give him enough carries, he'll be able to put up numbers similar to Edge & Priest Holmes.

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

Note that the Colts & Chiefs have ended up playing without a healthy Edgerrin James & Priest Holmes, respectively, quite often.  Using Westbrook that much would pretty much guarantee he'd be out and/or not nearly 100% for the playoffs.  Plus, giving him a deal like Deuce McAllister's is absurd.  If they do that, goodbye Mike Lewis.

[StevieLeftCollege]

And Westbrook's offer is EXTREMELY fair! Larry, what money would you like thrown at this guy? Seriously?

Well Westbrook doesn't think it's that fair. 

Westbrook's not a stupid guy...he knows many defensive coordinators consider him the most feared weapon of our offense.

As for compensation, I'd give him a deal near or at McAllister's.  On top of that, I'd plan to use Westbrook a lot more often.

And I think that's another issue Westbrook has with his role here...he wants the ball more often (I happen to believe his apparent fragility is overblown).   You give him enough carries, he'll be able to put up numbers similar to Edge & Priest Holmes.

You said it, IN OUR OFFENSE.  who is to say he would be as effective somewhere else?  look at the players around him and how they make westbrook the weapon he is.  Its a team effort. 

McAllister money?  thats TATER-esque right there man.  Thats double what he is offered now.  Duece is their offense, he can carry the load and not wear down.  Im from Philadelphia, I followed Westbrook at Nova and he was hurt there numerous times and again in high school.  Lets not forget that he hasnt been 100% either.  Hes a great player but hes not a top flight back.

[ice grillin you]

IGY has no clue what the Eagles are offering Westbrook, PG, and that's the problem here

lol...problem??

anyway...

theres not a person on this board that has any idea what the eagles are offering...this includes the 'fine print' they have included...theres more to a contract than the money and years that rich hoffmans "sources" are reporting...if those numbers are even true

but this wasnt meant to be a westbrook discussion...i just wanted to see if this board was on the nuts of the front office as hard as i had suspected

[StevieLeftCollege]

are we?

i get hard over football in general.

[PhillyGirl]

As for compensation, I'd give him a deal near or at McAllister's.  On top of that, I'd plan to use Westbrook a lot more often.

Completely and utterly preposterous comment right there. I can't take a damn thing you say serious after reading that.

[Eagles_Legendz]

You can't offer Westbrook money on par with McAllister.  It isn't financially responsible.  For what his role in the offense is, the contract that is *reportedly* on the table is more than fair.  He deserves to be categorized with the likes of D. Davis and Rudi Johnson, and his contract represents that.  I'm all for keeping Westbrook long term, but inking him to a deal similiar to the once Deuce received would signal the end of Michael Lewis and offer little flexibility elsewhere in the future.

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

The Eagles front office does a great job continually, only over-spending on positions and players when absolutely necessary.  If a WIP stooge like IGY wants to say I'm "on their nuts", then so be it.  It's not as if I can never point out an error they make (ie: I am starting to think paying Corey Simon $5m this year is a waste of salary cap money), but of all the things to complain and nit-pick about in Philadelphia sports, the Eagles front office is one of the last on the list.

Examples?

1.  Saying no to T.O.'s demands
The guy took over $9 million to the bank last season and will take $3.5 million this season.  That's real money, in his pocket.  If he'd kept his yap shut and continued to play to or above the level he played at in 2004 through 2005, the Eagles would be handing him a hefty roster bonus in 2006 or even MORE money through a contract renegotiation.  Now, he must produce at a MUCH higher level to approach that money from the Eagles or ANY team.  T.O. has been compensated fairly and would continue to be, would he have simply done his job.
2.  Negotiating with Westbrook
He cannot be a 30-touch-a-game back and retain his effectiveness, so the Eagles cannot pay him like one.  We all know they will pay him quite well to stay on a team and in a system where he knows he can have success.  If he wants to be paid like an every-down superstar back, he'll have to go elsewhere.  It would suck for the Eagles, and it would suck for him, but that's the fact of it.
3.  Trotter after 2001 season
The Eagles knew he was a "system" player with some shortcomings.  They offered to pay him well above what they would ever pay a linebacker, and he bitched and moaned, eventually signing a contract with Washington that was severely back-loaded and proved him to be only a decent player with injury concerns.
4.  Cutting loose Vincent and Taylor
This was the move that was supposed to basically cost the Eagles a shot at returning to the NFC Championship game.  Both players were hurt for much of the 2004 season, and while it looks like Vincent may get a chance to be a productive safety for the Bills, Taylor's fighting for a job as a nickel back.
5.  Letting Staley go to the Steelers
The Steelers were 15-1 in 2004 DESPITE Staley being only decent and being injured often, thanks to a revival of Jerome Bettis.  Now, Staley is aching again with knee problems, and Bettis has concerns about being run down before the season.  Does Staley have anything left?  Sure.  Did he have $15 million worth of production left as of last off-season?  HELL NO.

Yes, there are blunders, especially with some poor drafting.  However, I think Reid is improving with personnel decisions, and his working relationship with Heckert has been much more fruitful than with Modrak.  Banner and Howie are the best numbers geeks in the business, period.  Better to be on their nuts than on the nuts of the quacks with hosting/writing gigs on WIP or ESPN.

[Father Demon]

I side with the front office not only for the Eagles, but for the NFL.  I'm so farging tired of hearing players and agents complain that the team has the right to cut them, so they should have the right to hold out and demand a new contract.  Let's not lose sight that these rules and restrictions were approved by both management AND the players through the NFLPA.  The representatives in the NFLPA are put there to act in the best interests of the workers (like any union shop), and they agreed to these terms and rules.  And until the CBA has expired and another one is voted on and accepted in its place, tough shtein to those that don't like it.  It's not management against the players, as the press would have you believe.  It's management playing the game within the rules as agreed to.  Period.

Now, of course all that's happened in the last several years with players and agents leads me to believe that when it is time to renegotiate the CBA, it's not going to look very similar to how it does today.  I think the owners are going to have to make concessions such as guarenteed money, or grant the players rights for renegotiations.  Either way, it's not going to be pretty.