Ian Scott, run stopper, Philadelphia Eagle

[PhillyPhreak54]

Sweet.

[Feva]

Just keep it up...

[BigEd76]

Fat Lenny P:

Last week in this space, we noted that the Patriots, perhaps sensing an opportunity to land a solid player for a very palatable price, were sniffing around unrestricted free-agent defensive tackle Ian Scott. So it wasn't surprising when the four-year veteran, who played his entire career with Chicago as a part-time starter for the Bears, visited with New England officials on Thursday. The surprising part? That the persuasive Pats' brass, which characteristically does a masterful selling job even on reluctant prospects, didn't land Scott. Instead, Scott went from Foxboro to Philadelphia for a hastily arranged visit, and signed a one-year, $1 million deal with the Eagles. Scott had been consistently, and somewhat surprisingly, low-balled by teams like Atlanta and Minnesota in the free-agent market. He determined a few weeks ago that if he wasn't going to be able to land the kind of contract he anticipated at the outset of free agency, he would sign a one-year deal with a contender. His feeling was that he'd log snaps, win some games, and go back into the free-agent market again next year, and try to command the kind of money he thought he would be banking this spring.

Of course, it's going to be interesting to see just how many snaps Scott gets with the Eagles, given a defensive tackle depth chart that remains crowded even after the club sent starter Darwin Walker to Buffalo in the trade that landed standout linebacker Takeo Spikes. The Philadelphia coaches plan to start former first-round picks Mike Patterson (2005) and Brodrick Bunkley (2006) at tackle this year, even though the latter was all but invisible as a rookie. But earlier this spring, the Eagles signed Montae Reagor after Indianapolis released him, and he will command playing time. Scott and Reagor figure, at this point, to vie for the No. 3 spot in the rotation. That leaves Sam Rayburn and LaJuan Ramsey, and like most teams, the Eagles won't carry more than five tackles into the season. It seems like Rayburn, who had eight sacks his first two years but has just one in the past two, is the subject of trade rumors every spring. Maybe this is the year that Rayburn, who sure looks like the odd man out, gets dealt.

[rjs246]

I hate one-year contracts. This dude is young and supposedly very good at eating up blockers and they will have him for one year and then he'll be gone. Bunkley, Patterson, Scott could provide them with a variety of talents and depth for years to come. But instead they're gonna Stallworth him. One year contracts can suck it. SUCK IT.

[Don Ho]

exactly.  what is with the one year deal?

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

exactly.  what is with the one year deal?

As BigEd's article states... Scott didn't feel the long-term deals were good enough, so he decided to take a 1-year deal to try to cash in next offseason.

[Geowhizzer]

exactly.  what is with the one year deal?

As BigEd's article states... Scott didn't feel the long-term deals were good enough, so he decided to take a 1-year deal to try to cash in next offseason.

Nonsense.  It's all McNabb's fault!

[rjs246]

exactly.  what is with the one year deal?

As BigEd's article states... Scott didn't feel the long-term deals were good enough, so he decided to take a 1-year deal to try to cash in next offseason.

Everyone understands why Scott wanted a one-year deal. I just don't like this team giving out one-year deals to talented young players.

[Don Ho]

if this guy goes off this year, becomes a stud DT and than bolts on us....so help me god, i'll, i'll, i'll be really sad.

[General_Failure]

Don't worry, the Pats will give him a nice contract next year.

[Geowhizzer]

Don't worry, the Pats will give him a nice contract next year.

Or Mr. Snyder will roll up the Brinks truck to make Mr. Scott a very wealthy man.