Link (http://www.taterskins.com/news/APNewsDetail.jsp?id=13125)
QuoteNFL Draft Compensatory Picks List
NEW YORK (AP) - The 32 compensatory draft choices in the 2006 NFL Draft (April 29-30) awarded to teams that suffered a net loss of certain quality unrestricted free agents last year. The compensatory choices will supplement the 223 choices in the regular seven rounds of the draft, with picks positioned within the third through the seventh rounds based on the value of the free agent lost. Choices listed by round with overall selection in parentheses:
3 (97) New York Jets
4 (130) Denver
4 (131) Pittsburgh
4 (132) Baltimore
4 (133) Pittsburgh
5 (165) Green Bay
5 (166) Baltimore
5 (167) Pittsburgh
5 (168) Philadelphia
5 (169) Tennessee
6 (202) Tampa Bay
6 (203) Baltimore
6 (204) Philadelphia
6 (205) New England
6 (206) New England
6 (207) Indianapolis
6 (208) Baltimore
7 (241) Tampa Bay
7 (242) St. Louis
7 (243) St. Louis
7 (244) Tampa Bay
7 (245) Tennessee
7 (246) Tennessee
7 (247) Detroit
7 (248) Buffalo
7 (249) Seattle
7 (250) Washington
7 (251) Houston
7 (252) New Orleans
7 (253) Green Bay
7 (254) San Francisco
7 (255) Oakland
QuotePHILADELPHIA - Lost: Derrick Burgess, Jermane Mayberry, Ike Reese. Signed: Mike McMahon.
Not getting a 4th = straight up ROBBERY.
What a farging joke.
That seems a little ridiculous. Double digit sacks should equal a fourth.
why do the taterskins get a 7th. farg them.
Comp picks do nothing but piss off Danny and Joe because they can't trade them
The reason Burgess' pick was only a 5th is because the things are barely based on production, if at all. His contract was 5 years/17M or something like that, its not that big.
But still.
McMahon got a tiny contract. It should be a 4th.
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on March 27, 2006, 07:27:10 PM
Comp picks do nothing but piss off Danny and Joe because they can't trade them
this isnt the point. they dont deserve any picks. they dont deserve anything.
They deserve Art.
to die
Pittsburgh is bucking to have even more 4th round picks than the Eagles.
They lose enough quality to get TWO 4th round comp picks and a 5th (Burress & ??), and then win the Super Bowl?
Bah.
After losing Burgess, Mayberry and Reese, that is straight up bullshkit. Getting McMahon should have been even more reason to get a higher pick, the way he sucked.
From KFFL:
Quote
Eagles | Team receives two comp picks
Mon, 27 Mar 2006 17:34:57 -0800
The Philadelphia Eagles received two compensatory pick in the 2006 NFL Draft. The picks are No. 36 in the fifth round or No. 168 overall and No. 35 in the sixth round or No. 204 overall.
Not only do the fifth round and sixth round picks suck, but they are at the end of both rounds. zesty.
Swell, odds increased even more we draft a BYU project.
Quote from: PhillyPhaninDC on March 27, 2006, 09:14:45 PM
Not only do the fifth round and sixth round picks suck, but they are at the end of both rounds. zesty.
Comp picks are always added to the end of the round. What's your point?
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 27, 2006, 09:59:58 PM
Quote from: PhillyPhaninDC on March 27, 2006, 09:14:45 PM
Not only do the fifth round and sixth round picks suck, but they are at the end of both rounds. zesty.
Comp picks are always added to the end of the round. What's your point?
My point is......I didn't know they were always added to the end of the round. So thanks for schooling my retarded ass.
My other point is: You sir, may be with the gays.
I'm with them, but only to help me pick up chicks.
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 27, 2006, 10:06:21 PM
I'm with them, but only to help me pick up chicks.
And if that don't work, you always have something to fall back on, literally.
It's pretty much what that AdamJT13 guy predicted.
Bolded names were correct:
QuoteTHIRD ROUND
N.Y. Jets (LaMont Jordan, $5.51 million, 14 GP/14 GS)
FOURTH ROUND
Denver (Reggie Hayward, $5.0 million, 15/15)
Pittsburgh (Kendrell Bell, $4.974 million, 16/14)
Baltimore (Gary Baxter, $5.004 million, 5/5 IR)
Pittsburgh (Plaxico Burress, $4.167 million, 16/15)
Baltimore (Edgerton Hartwell, $4.375 million, 5/5 IR) -- ended up a 5th
FIFTH ROUND
Green Bay (Marco Rivera, $3.80 million, 14/14)
Pittsburgh (Oliver Ross, $3.50 million, 12/11)
Philadelphia (Derrick Burgess, $3.491 million, 16/12, Pro Bowl)
Tennessee (Andre Dyson, $3.501 million, 10/6)
Tampa Bay (Dwight Smith, $3.04 million, 15/15) -- ended up a 6th
Baltimore (Casey Rabach, $2.825 million, 16/16) -- ended up a 6th
SIXTH ROUND
Philadelphia (Jermane Mayberry, $3.009 million, 11/8)
New England (David Patten, $2.60 million, 9/7 IR)
New England (Joe Andruzzi, $2.194 million, 13/13)
Indianapolis (Rick DeMulling, $2.275 million, 14/5)
SEVENTH ROUND
Baltimore (Bennie Anderson, $1.706 million, 16/15) -- ended up a 6th
Tampa Bay (Chartric Darby, $1.0 million, 14/14)
St. Louis (Tommy Polley, $800,000, 16/15)
St. Louis (Matt Lehr, $710,000, 15/15)
Tampa Bay (Keith Burns, $790,000, 15/1)
Detroit (Stockar McDougle, $750,000, (8/2)
Buffalo (net value; lost $9.49 million, 19/19, IR ; signed $3.409 million, 26/23)
Seattle (net value; lost $12.167 million, 47/43; signed $7.001 million, 40/35)
Washington (net value; lost $10.075 million, 24/21; signed $5.425 million, 25/23 IR)
Houston (non-compensatory)
New Orleans (non-compensatory)
Green Bay (non-compensatory)
San Francisco (non-compensatory)
Oakland (non-compensatory)
Tennessee (non-compensatory) -- reached 255, so it wasn't awarded
New York Jets (non-compensatory) -- reached 255, so it wasn't awarded
Looks like the only ones he missed were the 2 Tennessee ones in the 7th where they lost Antowain Smith and Shad Meier....
Quote from: shorebird on March 27, 2006, 11:01:25 PM
And if that don't work, you always have something to fall back on, literally.
Feel free to not share what you do with your free time.
Infuriating.
Who'd the Jets lose to earn a three?
Quote from: MadMarchHare on March 28, 2006, 07:42:40 AM
Who'd the Jets lose to earn a three?
BigEd's post details that and much more, and was less than 5 posts ago. (http://www.concretefield.com/forum/index.php?topic=18098.msg399462#msg399462)
Lamont Jordan.
:P Like I could be bothered to read the last page?
Besides, I have a PhD. That guarantees I'm an idiot.
i dont underatand why any teams should get comp picks....so you get rewarded for having a zesty offseason?
i got a good idea...dont trade the nfl sack leader for the worst qb in the nfl and then you dont have to worry about any of this
Quote from: MadMarchHare on March 28, 2006, 07:50:48 AM
Besides, I have a PhD. That guarantees I'm an idiot.
I thought it was an MBA that guaranteed idiocy.
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 28, 2006, 07:59:28 AM
i got a good idea...dont trade the nfl sack leader for the worst qb in the nfl and then you dont have to worry about any of this
Yeah, because we all thought Burgess was not only going to stay healthy the whole season, but become the NFL sack leader. Yeah, we really saw that coming. Yeah.
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 28, 2006, 08:31:20 AM
Quote from: MadMarchHare on March 28, 2006, 07:50:48 AM
Besides, I have a PhD. That guarantees I'm an idiot.
I thought it was an MBA that guaranteed idiocy.
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 28, 2006, 07:59:28 AM
i got a good idea...dont trade the nfl sack leader for the worst qb in the nfl and then you dont have to worry about any of this
Yeah, because we all thought Burgess was not only going to stay healthy the whole season, but become the NFL sack leader. Yeah, we really saw that coming. Yeah.
it's their job to see that coming.
The decision to allow Burgess to go elsewhere, at the time it was made, was a solid decision.
Anyone want to bet he stays healthy through 2006?
Didn't think so.
Yeah, because we all thought Burgess was not only going to stay healthy the whole season, but become the NFL sack leader. Yeah, we really saw that coming. Yeah.
like hunt said player evaluation is their job and free agency is all about player evauluation
anyone whod seen burgess play even a little knew he was a beast...the injuries were the issue...i wasnt pissed at them when he left but only because i believed their spin that the money was outrageous...well looking back it wasnt and they shouldnt be rewarded for letting him go and only bringing in mcmahon to complete their offseason...if anything the raiders should get the xtra pick for making a wonderfully bold move
its pathetic to here you people bitch and moan about the birds getting a fifth round comp pick rather than a fourth lol...get a hold of yourselves and realize they dont deserve shtein for doing what they did last offseason...and that goes for any team not just the eagles
no, it was a horrible decision...burgess led the nfl in sacks & the eagles couldn't get near the qb all season.
at the time, the eagles were following their usual plug & pray strategy of not paying top dollar for guys and plugging in their cheaper backups & hoping they pan out. and they didn't.
i love hindsight, everyone is so smart then.
the guy hadn't stayed healthy since is rookie year, and he stayed healthy for this year. good for him, good for the Raiders, but to rip the Eagles is so asinine.
hunt are you kidding me with this drivel?
Burgess played like 8 games in THREE SEASONS and wanted a big payday. He got one on a team willing to take a risk. The Eagles had already lost him for 2 full seasons and half of another. Sure, he showed some signs of being a solid player, especially in that playoff game vs. the Falcons. But that was no reason to pay the guy 30 mil on potential alone.
Had they done it and he got hurt again, you'd be whining and crying that the Eagles FO farged up.
Quote from: Sun_Mo on March 28, 2006, 08:56:31 AM
i love hindsight, everyone is so smart then.
the guy hadn't stayed healthy since is rookie year, and he stayed healthy for this year. good for him, good for the Raiders, but to rip the Eagles is so asinine.
amen.
i know you're all brainwashed but c'mon...admit it was a mistake.
Now we know it was a mistake, sure. In fact, I'm going to find all the Eagles most recent mistakes for you.
of course it was a bad decision, anyone can say that after the season was over. but find me where you or anybody else was pissed that the Eagles let an injury prone DE go for the money the Raiders gave him, when it happened. find me where you said that he would stay healthy this year and have a monster year like the Eagles had waited for 3 years for. then, you get some credit. but this whole crying over spilled milk thing, it's weak.
Burgess played like 8 games in THREE SEASONS and wanted a big payday
it wasnt that big a payday for the talent they were getting
Sure, he showed some signs of being a solid player, especially in that playoff game vs. the Falcons
dont pretend it was one game as the eagles like to spin it...he was great his whole rookie year...yes the injuries were the issue but looking back and seeing he didnt get all that much money shows that it was indeed a mistake
Had they done it and he got hurt again, you'd be whining and crying that the Eagles FO farged up.
no way i would ever get mad for paying a player who has a chance to be great...jevon kearse had been hurt off and on for two years before the eagles signed him to a lot more cake than burgess...but i wouldnt for a second criticize that move even tho kearse has been less than stellar (burgess had more sacks last year than kearse does in his eagle career)
its going after guys that arent and dont have a chance to be good that i get pissed off about
whatever...it's a pointless argument now.
they had the guy for 4 years so you'd think they'd see his potential...even worse than letting him go was not adequately replacing him...much worse, imo.
btw, player evaluation is not my job...there are people on the eagles' staff who do that for a living...and they were wrong.
you honestly think the Eagles didn't see what talent the guy had?
Kearse missed ONE season and then like 2 games the following season for unrelated injuries.
Burgess had a nice rookie season and then missed TWO ENTIRE SEASONS in a row, and then a good part of 2004 with the separated sternum.
Don't even compare the 2.
kearse missed two games that year but was plagued all year with what people were saying were chronic foot injuries...and yes burgess missed more time but he also got paid tons less...so money vs time lost is actually comparable in this situation
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 28, 2006, 08:31:20 AM
Quote from: MadMarchHare on March 28, 2006, 07:50:48 AM
Besides, I have a PhD. That guarantees I'm an idiot.
I thought it was an MBA that guaranteed idiocy.
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 28, 2006, 07:59:28 AM
i got a good idea...dont trade the nfl sack leader for the worst qb in the nfl and then you dont have to worry about any of this
Yeah, because we all thought Burgess was not only going to stay healthy the whole season, but become the NFL sack leader. Yeah, we really saw that coming. Yeah.
An MBA guarantees medicority, a lemmings degree. Only a true idiot would suffer through the indescribable assault 5 pompous, arrogant fargheads put one through because a) you work cheap and b) they had to suffer through it too. At least an MBA has a defined endpoint, instead of waiting for 5 blowhards to tell you, yeah, OK, I guess you can be done. It's amazing more grad students don't murder their entire committee, if not the entire department.
But I'm not bitter. :paranoid
farg the Raiders for not giving Burgess more money.
Quote from: MURP on March 28, 2006, 09:15:53 AM
farg the Raiders for not giving Burgess more money.
Finally, someone gets it.
1. Yes, Burgess did have a nice rookie season. That is why in 2002 when he broke his foot they kept his ass on the 53-man roster the entire season instead of putting him on IR.
2. So after the broken foot of 2002, the torn achilles of 2003, the separated sternum and 2.5 sacks in 2004 he leaves the Eagles and stays healthy and has a monster season.
3. The hindsighters and FO haters like to point out that they let Burgess go. But those people who are now crying over the loss of Burgess would've been the same group of people blasting the FO had they re-signed him and he got hurt again in 2005.
4. The Eagles knew he had talent but the man just could not stay healthy. Is that so hard to understand? I think it is. But hey, don't let some facts interrupt you guys bitching about them signing a guy who, like Burgess, was injured much of the past two seasons.
Get Burgess!!1
they were wrong...but i'd like to see you explain away their failure to adequately replace him.
ready......go!
Simple. They saw signs of improvement and drive in their 2003 first round selection, one they traded up to get.
Then he got shot.
signs of improvement and drive, huh?
more proof of their ineptitude!
but....but...but...the eagles should've seen ahead that he was gonna get shot. duh
I had him in my death pool. And just like everyone else in my death pool he survived against the odds. Figures.
Quote from: Sun_Mo on March 28, 2006, 11:35:56 AM
but....but...but...the eagles should've seen ahead that he was gonna get shot. duh
or that he never showed a damn thing in the nfl...either one.
Lets assume Burgess was re-signed and playing for the Eagles last season, their record is still 6-10.
Not if McNabb wasn't injured they weren't.
mcdougle was another one that didnt even impress in college so why would they think he was gonna be a pro...and they traded up for him...i find it funny that the eagles are somehow able to find the only miami hurricanes that cant play in the league
Wrong. 7-9.
Lets assume Burgess was re-signed and playing for the Eagles last season, their record is still 6-10.
yeah but maybe they sign randel el hutchinson arrington peterson or witherspoon instead of howard
Still pimping Randle El, huh IGY?
:-D
Still pimping Randle El, huh IGY?
oh i get it...cause i listed numerous players that could have filled holes it was a pimping randel el post...even for you thats a big reach...and kind of weak...
unless you were using it as an excuse to use 'pimping' in a post...then congrats
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 28, 2006, 11:42:12 AM
yeah but maybe they sign randel el hutchinson arrington peterson or witherspoon instead of howard
As it was, their primary FA target was Bentley, not Howard. Who knows if they would have gone after both players if they were able to get Bentley?
There is no way they would have been serious players for Randle-El, Arrington, Peterson, or Witherspoon after the CBA completed, with or without Burgess on the team.
oh lord
the point is its one less hole they would have had to fill
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 28, 2006, 11:46:46 AM
oh lord
the point is its one less hole they would have had to fill
Big whoop. They had and have plenty of money to fill all the holes via free agency if they wanted to do so.
They ignored the holes at SAM and DT completely so far. Would that have changed if they still had Burgess? I doubt it.
why is that such a stretch to say that if they didnt sign howard they would have signed another bigger type named free agent instead
no different than if they still had TO they dont sign gaffney and instead get someone else
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 28, 2006, 11:51:37 AM
why is that such a stretch to say that if they didnt sign howard they would have signed another bigger type named free agent instead
Because they simply will not pay a linebacker what Peterson and Witherspoon got and what Arrington will get, and because there's no way they would have offered Randle-El more money than the taterskins did.
dayum...you really can tell the future but you don't think the eagles FO should be able to. isn't that a little odd?
no every other team can do what you are talking about, they can predict the future of all their young players?
Quote from: Sun_Mo on March 28, 2006, 11:58:44 AM
no every other team can do what you are talking about, they can predict the future of all their young players?
that was even more poorly worded than mine...well done!
and the answer is yes?
yeah, i re-read that and realized that it's something someone with downs would say.
the point being, teams can predict the future with their young players, and all of them do it 100%?
Quote from: hunt on March 28, 2006, 11:57:06 AM
dayum...you really can tell the future but you don't think the eagles FO should be able to. isn't that a little odd?
Are you saying that you really think the Eagles would have gone hard after farging Randle-El or a linebacker if they'd kept Burgess around last off-season? That's laughable.
Plus, I'm not predicting the future. I'm predicting the present in an alternate universe. Try to keep up.
Quote from: FFatPatt on March 28, 2006, 12:04:08 PM
Quote from: hunt on March 28, 2006, 11:57:06 AM
dayum...you really can tell the future but you don't think the eagles FO should be able to. isn't that a little odd?
Are you saying that you really think the Eagles would have gone hard after farging Randle-El or a linebacker if they'd kept Burgess around last off-season? That's laughable.
not specifically but they would've had 1 less need so they could've spent that $$$ elsewhere....or they could be really, really, really under the cap instead of just really, really under.
are you saying had howard not be signed their offseason would have consisted of schobel barber gaffney and garcia???
Don't forget that they (re-)signed the top OT in the free agent market too...
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 28, 2006, 12:06:05 PM
are you saying had howard not be signed their offseason would have consisted of schobel barber gaffney and garcia???
I'm saying that it wouldn't have consisted of a top-name LB or Antwaan Randle-El.
Maybe they'd have gone after Andre Carter and/or Rocky Bernard had they lost out on Howard one way or another.
stop saying "Are you saying..." and just re read the farging post again.
are you saying that you hate that phrase?
Re read the farging post again?
I don't like that sentence. not one bit.
re read again
yes. if you'd just read, then re-read, and then re-read again...we'd be in a much better place.
I've been rendered illiterate.
It burns when I pee
What's been lost in all this is that the Steelers got a 4th round compensatory pick for losing OT Oliver Ross... a guy who this same stupid Eagles FO let go after having him on the squad in 1999!!!
that is incredibly accurate (http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/12663)
thats why the steelers win lombardis and the eagles win gold standards
Get Bettis!
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 28, 2006, 12:55:35 PM
thats why the steelers win lombardis and the eagles win gold standards
The Steelers let this guy go and THEN won a Lombardi, without Ross OR the compensatory pick they got for him!
Amazing!
Wowee!!
its amazing its incredible its....its....A WIFFLE FOOTBALL!!!
Ok, now we can It burns when I pee.