players vs front office

Started by ice grillin you, August 07, 2005, 08:28:01 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Larry

Quote from: PhillyGirl on August 07, 2005, 01:34:18 PM
Quote from: Larry on August 07, 2005, 11:35:44 AM

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.

In other words, you don't have a viable retort.  :-D

I find it funny that people think Westbrook can't handle a big load.  When has Westbrook ever worn down?   He hasn't because he's never been given the opportunity to wear down.  How do you know he'll wear down if he's given 300+ touches?  You don't.

And his injuries have little or nothing to do with 'fatigue' or too much of a workload.  Injuries are freak occurences...they can happen on the 1st carry or the 300th carry.  I've never heard of someone saying, "Geez, the ACL tear was due to too many carries..."  :boom

McAlister had these same injury worries coming out of college.  That's why he dropped in the draft.  Some, including Kiper, had him as the top-ranked player in 2001.  He was given the opportunity to be the feature back -- after the Saints dumped Williams -- and he's excelled.   Why can't Westy do the same?

More Mahe please.

General_Failure

So I guess the odds of injury don't increase with a heavier workload.

The man. The myth. The legend.

ice grillin you

I find it funny that people think Westbrook can't handle a big load.  When has Westbrook ever worn down?   He hasn't because he's never been given the opportunity to wear down.  How do you know he'll wear down if he's given 300+ touches?  You don't.

moreover he shouldnt be punished in negotiations because of the way Reid chooses to use him...its very much like a conflict of interest...the guy paying you is the same guy who controls your output
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

PhillyPhreak54

Joe Banner and Howie Roseman do the negotiations, IGY. Not Andy Reid.

Reid tells Banner who he wants on the team and Banner handles the dollars and cents.

ice grillin you

reid is the gm he is the one who equates performance with dollars
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

PhillyPhreak54

Like I said, Reid identifies players he wants on his team -- then Banner goes out and does the deals.

Reid, Banner and others have said this before.

Take the Kearse thing for instance. Reid said he wanted a top notch pass rushing DE. Jevon Kearse and Darren Howard were the top two choices. Howard got franchised so Banner said he called Rosenhaus at 12:01am to start negotiations.

Banner is the one doing the deal with Fletcher Smith and Brian Westbrook. Andy Reid is not doing the monetary portion of the deal.

Larry

But I do believe the "running back by commitee approach" does have a cap economic aspect to it:

3 RBs producing x yards is a helluva lot cheaper than 1 rb producing 3x yards.
More Mahe please.

Eaglez

#37
You are bound by the terms of your contract, especially early on in a long term deal.

TO signed a deal last year, and yet he wants a new deal a year into his contract? I don't see how that works.

Westbrook signed a 1 year tender this offseason. He knew the terms of his contract and understood what he was getting into. Yet he still held out. It's not like Westy is in the last year of a 5 year deal where he tore it up on the field and is grossly underpaid. I'm a firm believer in adhering to the terms of your agreement.

Why do players want long term deals in the NFL anyways? It's not like the NBA where it is all guarenteed money. The game in the NFL is that you want a mid/short term deal with a ton of money up front with a huge signing bonus. That is what perplexes me about Corey Simon. He is going to be paid the same rate as the average top 5 DT's yet he refuses the sign. A one year deal, you get 5 million bucks. Have a great year and then go out and make a killing in FA.

Short term deals with a ton of money up front is where it is at. Yet you see players take these deals where all of their contract money is backloaded and somehow they are happy (like J-Trot, who could have made more money if he just stayed with Philly the first time). I just don't get it.

Stupid NFL players. There is probably some stipend in NFL contracts that agents put in where the largest sum of money the agent can secure for you is what they are actually paid. For example, if a player signs for 7 years, 49 million, the comission for the agent comes off of that 49 million or they recieve a larger percentage because they got 'more money' for their client, even though there client will probably never see seasons 5, 6, and 7 of their deal since they are the years with the highest base salaries.

Oh well.

Eaglez

In contract negotiations, you don't want to bank money on what the RB 'could' do. Saying that Westbrook 'could' carry the same load as McCallister is a speculation, and when you are trying to fit players under the cap you don't want to say that he simply can and then pay him to later find out that he can't. That's how teams around the league get into cap problems in the first place. Overpay for players, watch their productivity deteriorate, and then get stuck with cap penalties and a complex payroll.

The Eagles have been so competitive because they know where to put their money and how to structure salaries to stay competitive in pursing FA's and locking up key players for the long term. This is all a credit to Andy Reid's coaching and his staff as well as Banner's genius managing the cap.

With that being said, Westbrook should not recieve McCallister money. His role in this offense is never going to be one in which he gets 30 carries a game running, let alone 30 touches in the entire game period.

All Westbrook has to do is report to camp, or go through this ordeal next year again when we retain him as a RFA.

ice grillin you

But I do believe the "running back by commitee approach" does have a cap economic aspect to it:

3 RBs producing x yards is a helluva lot cheaper than 1 rb producing 3x yards.


because im retarded lawrence says it better than i ever could...listen to this man
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

PoopyfaceMcGee

Phreak, Reid obviously has a say in the dollars.  He's the end of the line for talent evaluation, so he has to at least communicate to Banner a general idea of how valuable the player is to the team in order to sign him.

As for those saying that Reid is "holding back" Westbrook or the team is punishing him by not giving him as many snaps or runs as the premier workhorse backs in the league, are you all farging insane?  NO WAY IN HELL Westbrook would be nearly as effective at the end of the season and into the playoffs were the Eagles to play him that much.  Even the big guys wear down over that kind of use, and Westbrook's wear and tear would be worse.

The guy has an important role on this team and fills it in a uniquely amazing way, no doubt.  But, he will NEVER be the every-down, workhorse back that he's asking to be paid like.  PERIOD.

Diomedes

There are situations in which I would back the player over the FO.  Antonio Gates is in the middle of one now.  I just haven't seen the situation arise here in which I would agree with the player.
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

QB Eagles

In a situation where even the player's agent thinks holding out is a bad idea, it's safe to say I think it's a bad idea too.

Philly_Crew

Quote from: ice grillin you on August 07, 2005, 08:40:21 PM
But I do believe the "running back by commitee approach" does have a cap economic aspect to it:

3 RBs producing x yards is a helluva lot cheaper than 1 rb producing 3x yards.


because im retarded lawrence says it better than i ever could...listen to this man

Why?  If the team is able to get a running game of 1,500 rushing yards using three backs, paying them $3 mill, $1.5 mill, and $0.5 mill, why would it want to pay one back $5 mill and try to get him to rush for the 1,500?  Isn't what the Eagles are doing smart?  I think Westbrook is terrific in our system, but I think the Eagles rushing game can still produce if Buck and Moats stay healthy.

rjs246

#44
Combined stats for Duce, Westbrook and Buck from the 3-headed monster year:
1618 yds rushing, 20 tds rushing, 847 yds receiving, 7 tds receiving.

Combined stats for Westbrook and Dorsey from last year with Westbrook being 'the guy':
1222 yds rushing, 7 tds rushing, 795 yds receiving, 6 tds receiving.


If Westbrook thinks that this team was made better by him being the feature back he's smoking crack. These contract numbers being thrown around are completely insane.
Is rjs gonna have to choke a bitch?

Let them eat bootstraps.