48 minutes ago, justwinbaby said:

I think he's talking a tag and trade. Berman even mentioned today on their podcast that he would give up 22 to trade for Burns. He's really in on him

That would be dumb

22 minutes ago, TEW said:

Negotiate with whom?

No sports book is going to agree to give NFL players "equity” in sports betting, let alone all "gambling.”

 

19 minutes ago, NYEagle said:

No way the NFL would allow sports betting to pay the players...that's just dumb

 

There are physical sportsbooks operating in stadiums where it’s legal to take bets during the game. If someone purchased a jersey at the pro shop, the players get a cut of that. They probably just want the same thing with gambling that goes on at the stadiums.

58 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

 

I know the NFL makes money from sports betting advertising.  I assume that's all part of the revenue sharing.  I am not sure how players could have equity in gambling businesses.   I am pretty sure there's laws preventing athletes from having a stake in gambling on their sports. The more I think about it the more it seems like a nonsensical idea.  

Maybe they should focus on getting rid of the rookie salary caps and better injury guarantees.  

3 minutes ago, wussbasket said:

 

There are physical sportsbooks operating in stadiums where it’s legal to take bets during the game. If someone purchased a jersey at the pro shop, the players get a cut of that. They probably just want the same thing with gambling that goes on at the stadiums.

That revenue is already accounted for by the team, presumably as rent or licensing.

This is just dumb.

1 hour ago, Mike030270 said:

 

I wouldn't bet on it Kayvon 

1: Dejean CB

2A: Wilson LB

2B: Rowrowtheboat DT

3: James Thrash Jr. WR

 

 

Just now, TEW said:

That revenue is already accounted for by the team, presumably as rent or licensing.

This is just dumb.

In paramutual wagering, horse racing, there is a percentage of the take that goes to the track and to the benefits fund for horseman. OTB as well for wagers placed off the track. I can see the NFL wanting to secure a piece of the action, then via that arrangement to the owners and then to the players. If nothing else, as part of the pension and benefits program for retired players. Legal wagering is monitored and can be tracked.

1 minute ago, TEW said:

That revenue is already accounted for by the team, presumably as rent or licensing.

This is just dumb.

Are you sure of this?

 

 

 

15 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Projected to get 12-15m per season. We'll see if that proves accurate, but TJ Edwards is objectively a better LB and the Eagles let him go for 6.5m per. It would be absurd to go out and sign an inferior player for more than double the price. Zero interest in Queen. He's decent, but nothing special, plays in a great defense next to maybe the best off ball LB in the NFL.

They would be getting Queen off of a career year which is never good.  I think Josey Jewell, Blake Cashman or Jerome Banks would be cheaper and potentially better fits.  

3 minutes ago, UK Eagle said:

 

Reddick for Anderson

We'll see if the Eagles pursue McKinney. He's the top safety available.

Just now, NCiggles said:

Reddick for Anderson

I would too.

Sadly, the most we'd get is Barnett.  But would be interesting to see how they could parlay that into trading for Burns

4 minutes ago, UK Eagle said:

 

Houston has 23, 59 and 86 overall. I wouldn't trade Reddick for 59, unless they're adding 2025 picks on top of it.

21 minutes ago, wussbasket said:

 

There are physical sportsbooks operating in stadiums where it’s legal to take bets during the game. If someone purchased a jersey at the pro shop, the players get a cut of that. They probably just want the same thing with gambling that goes on at the stadiums.

The sports books aren't owned by the teams.  To the extent the NFL gets revenue from whatever fees are charged for operating in the stadium, then the players get a cut of the revenue.  

10 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

That would be dumb

Considering the other options they have yeah it doesn't seem to be the best. Hypothetically if you trade Reddick for a 2nd and then you give up 22 for Burns it could make more sense than at first glance. You're basically trading a round down in the draft for 4 years of youth for a very good pass rusher in his prime. 

Just now, RLC said:

Houston has 23, 59 and 86 overall. I wouldn't trade Reddick for 59, unless they're adding 2025 picks on top of it.

I don't see a team trading a first for him.  59 would be good.  

 

1 hour ago, Mike030270 said:

 

Spoiler

 

Don’t know when we hit it but TATE is at 1 million posts on the new board.

@VaBeach_Eagle

The board as a whole hit 1 Million on August 2, 2022. We're at 1.6+ million right now. 

 

IF they decide to trade Reddick, Houston would at least be a good destination that he wouldn't kill you unless you are in the SB. Slim chance they play against Houston in 2025 depending on how they both finish in the division but it's likely you wouldn't face him until 2026. 

The thing about McKinney though is he'll be the top FA safety on the market, but he's not in the class of a Marcus Williams and he'll probably get paid like he is. I'm not sure I'm willing to spend 17m per season on McKinney. If CJGJ could be had for one year 5 million, McKinney isn't 12m per season better than CJGJ. He just isn't.

5 minutes ago, VaBeach_Eagle said:

The board as a whole hit 1 Million on August 2, 2022. We're at 1.6+ million right now. 

 

Oh wow. Yea I completely missed that. Great news we're more than halfway to the next milestone 

6 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

 

19 minutes ago, UK Eagle said:

 

Both deserve conversations with Howie.

1 minute ago, Mike030270 said:

Oh wow. Yea I completely missed that. Great news we're more than halfway to the next milestone 

You can see the total number of posts for the board at the bottom of the 'Twitter' link (I suppose that link should be re-named since Twitter isn't Twitter anymore...):

https://www.eaglesmessageboard.com/twitter/