*whispers* Barnett on a one-year, $10M deal isn’t that bad. 

1 hour ago, downundermike said:

Looking at the NFL free agent tracker, Eagles are the only team who has not acquired a player via sign or trade.

https://www.nfl.com/news/2021-nfl-free-agency-tracker-signings-trades-contract-details-for-all-32-teams

 

The explanation is obvious - Roseman is tired of the criticism that his recent FA acquisitions have garnered.

 

4 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Who did we draft with the comp pick we got for cutting him?

Don't get a comp pick for cutting a player.

6 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Who did we draft with the comp pick we got for cutting him?

I strongly disagree.  He’s not worth $10 million. Best thing about that is they wouldn’t be locking up an average player long term.  

6 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

*whispers* Barnett on a one-year, $10M deal isn’t that bad. 

He'll only be 25 this year. He has time to improve himself but he's not worth a big contract IMO. Maybe the new DC and Dline coach and help him.

12 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Who did we draft with the comp pick we got for cutting him?

It was either Driscoll or the one we traded to Dallas

34 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I wasn’t expecting much, but I’m hoping we’re able to carve out enough room to get 2-3 decent buy-low or prove-it players, not just veteran minimum types. 

I like him. 

Yep.  Solid all around. 

10 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Don't get a comp pick for cutting a player.

We did because he came off the cancellation chart and freed up the comp pick for Hicks

15 minutes ago, Peppersmacks said:

What type of law do you practice?  I'm an IP litigator.  

@BigEFly was on the insurance side of things as an Exec and not an attorney. 

18 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

He was not on the Plaintiff Steering Committee for the BP litigation, which carried the water for the plaintiffs. The BP litigation really made no attorney’s name except the counsel that set the boundaries for making a claim against the fund.  It was even worse than the asbestos bankruptcy funds requirements, if that can be possible.  
 

The attorneys that made their names were the Transocean and Halliburton attorneys that wrote their contracts with BP.   Transocean had a knock for knock hold harmless with BP where they were not responsible for anything under the Gulf surface but were responsible for injury and death to their employees.   Within scope of the LA Oilfield Anti-indemnity Statute.  That meant Transocean had to deal with most of the injury and death claims from the rig but not for polluting the Gulf.  Halliburton literally skated almost free on the strength of their contract.  Insurance companies were blessed in that BP was basically bare of insurance. (BP tried to grab Transocean’s insurance for their pollution claims but was shot down by the courts. )  

So BP set a huge fund that they thought capped their exposure but the parameters for making a claim were comical.  Ken Feinberg mediated and made a name for himself negotiating the 1,000 page agreement. (Salary czar for the 2008 recovery.) BP screwed itself when they agreed to the parameters. The parameters were basically having to prove financial loss during the time frame of the spill and sign a form that you suffered a loss from the spill, but the two did not have to be related.  BP later litigated trying to change the parameters but the courts shot them down.

The fraud was phenomenal.  There was actually a plaintiff firm in FL that sent out a flier that pretty much said you didn’t have to suffer damages from the spill to make a claim.  Billboards spread throughout the South. Meanwhile, real victims struggled to get paid because the fund administrator was overwhelmed.  I guarantee you that some of those same firms have billboards up in Texas soliciting for freeze victims right now.   

The side story of the missing 41k plaintiffs, the alleged misuse of social security numbers, how the lawyers involved were acquitted and the subsequent suit by one of their litigation investors should be a movie.

I think your take is missing the plaintiff's side of things.  He apparently was among the first to sue.   He was the lawyer featured in this NYT article: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/magazine/07oil-t.html  

1 minute ago, Mike030270 said:

He'll only be 25 this year. He has time to improve himself but he's not worth a big contract IMO. Maybe the new DC and Dline coach and help him.

If he didn't thrive in Jim Schwartz scheme I doubt he will in this next one.

8 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

I strongly disagree.  He’s not worth $10 million. Best thing about that is they wouldn’t be locking up an average player long term.  

He's on a one year deal where he has to play well to earn that 2nd deal. So keeping him on $10 million when it's not really keeping the team from signing someone else allows the chance of a comp pick if nothing else. 

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

If he didn't thrive in Jim Schwartz scheme I doubt he will in this next one.

Are they similar? I didn't watch Colts much at all. I was under the impression they would be different

2 hours ago, NCiggles said:

I don't think this has anything to do with his trade request.  When you say the "standard for evidence," do you mean the burden of proof? There is no standard of evidence.  Evidence is either admissible in Court or not admissible.  The credibility of the evidence is determined by the fact finder.  The admissibility is determined by the judge.  

It might not.  But then again, the accusation and timing are highly suspicious.

I am indeed referring to the credibility of the evidence... "evidence" can be admissible, such as the accuser's testimony, for example... but the testimony can also be willful deception or deliberate lies.  In these types of cases, there is seldom physical evidence after the fact... it will be a he-said, she-said type deal.  In all likelihood.  My radar is up because of the high profile situation involved here, along with a lack of history with the accused and it seemingly being out of character.  We will see what happens. 

41 minutes ago, Iggles25 said:

Cardinals WR group: Hopkins, Fitzgerald, A.J Green, 

Okay I'm a little jelly.

 

Their gm runs circles around howie. Embarrassing. 

21 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

*whispers* Barnett on a one-year, $10M deal isn’t that bad. 

It'll be easy to trade that at the trade deadline too. 

1 minute ago, Mike030270 said:

Are they similar? I didn't watch Colts much at all. I was under the impression they would be different

No one is 100% sure what the new Defense will exactly be, just saying under Schwartz and his one gap Wide-9 variant it's where D-linemen thrive. The only Defense I can think of that's better for DE's is Washburns Wide-9 where you just abandon run responsibility and go straight to the QB. That's how Babin got like 18 sacks the one year. 

1 minute ago, RLC said:

It'll be easy to trade that at the trade deadline too. 

Not when he's playing injured

Was just listening to the Avant/Mikell podcast and reminiscing over the Eagles of the 2010s, and just thought about how much of a **** Jason Babin was. Screw that guy.

Why is Barnett prepping to get $10M guaranteed? Paging Howie...

Terrible 

45 minutes ago, Iggles25 said:

Cardinals WR group: Hopkins, Fitzgerald, A.J Green, 

Okay I'm a little jelly.

 

Green is on a decline. Fitz is old but reliable. Hopkins is still Hopkins though

Murray wont have an excuse not to reach 4000 yds

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

No one is 100% sure what the new Defense will exactly be, just saying under Schwartz and his one gap Wide-9 variant it's where D-linemen thrive. The only Defense I can think of that's better for DE's is Washburns Wide-9 where you just abandon run responsibility and go straight to the QB. That's how Babin got like 18 sacks the one year. 

Gotcha. I was just trying to think of a positive. I haven't been impressed with him but he is still young

2 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Green is on a decline. Fitz is old but reliable. Hopkins is still Hopkins though

Murray wont have an excuse not to reach 4000 yds

The also have Kirk and Isabella

There are a ton of players much worse than Barnett making a lot more than 10 million/year. DEs are EXPENSIVE.

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

The also have Kirk and Isabella

How's their Oline? Seems like they are building around him correctly

Wish we had some cap space...