12 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

To be fair....the cap keeps growing, so cap dollars this year are worth more than cap dollars next year.

I don’t think the kicking the can thing is as bad as most think. It’s really just about  optionality. A good chunk likely gets carried over, so it’s no harm no foul in many cases.

My issue is the use of cap space on players like Joe Flacco, extending Alshon, setting money on fire for Eric Wilson, etc. We’ll see what Cox’s contract really is, but I’m hopeful it’s not too much of an overpay. Honestly, though, I would have been just fine moving on and using that money (let’s call it $8M for sake of the argument) on player(s) who can help in 2022 and beyond. 

24 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I don’t disagree but at least he lost his Nike and Beats deals, and will probably never get a major endorsement deal again 

Those are outside the NFL.  His primary gig is the NFL, and they've done nothing but pamper, insulate and appease him... and now financially reward him.

16 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

I'm about to state the obvious:

Good QB means players will come

Without a good QB money talks

Eagles have neither.

 

9 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

To be fair....the cap keeps growing, so cap dollars this year are worth more than cap dollars next year.

And this team is going no where this year, so spending future money, even if its only 80 cents on the dollar is foolishness to make a one or two win difference.  This team still hasn't got the QB to make a bit of difference, and hasn't gotten a defense that can mitigate that QB's ineffectiveness.   This is NFL Purgatory, hard to dig out of, and as they continue to borrow from the future to push themselves in to the 15-20 draft range, rather than allow themselves to naturally fall to the top 10 while getting younger players more reps and experience, all they are doing is prolonging the purgatory, or increasing the cost (draft capital) to move up for a QB that might help them get out of it. 

13 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

That makes me feel slightly better.    This wasn't a great move though, even if its at only $7M.   Cox isn't at the same level of leadership or player as Kelce or Dawkins.  Those guys you overpay to keep around for one more year.  Cox?  He's not even the best DT on the team, possibly not even the 2nd best.   And once the draft rolls around, I'd like to think he'd be working to remain top 3. 

As I said they day they released him,  it makes sense to give him about 10, and put 5M in NLTBEs based on sack total,  snaps, abs super bowl.

 

I studier they still freed up around 5M in cap along with the 11M from the Slay restructure.

 

Mathieu, and Landry incoming. I hope.

9 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

My glimmer of hope is his Cox wasn’t interested in leaving so his agent didn’t even explore offers and we can trade him at least at the deadline. Far fetched, I know. 

Let's hope a team is desperate to make that final push, like the Rams were with Von Miller.

I'm fine bringing back Cox. 

7 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t think the kicking the can thing is as bad as most think. It’s really just about  optionality. A good chunk likely gets carried over, so it’s no harm no foul in many cases.

My issue is the use of cap space on players like Joe Flacco, extending Alshon, setting money on fire for Eric Wilson, etc. We’ll see what Cox’s contract really is, but I’m hopeful it’s not too much of an overpay. Honestly, though, I would have been just fine moving on and using that money (let’s call it $8M for sake of the argument) on player(s) who can help in 2022 and beyond. 

Precisely.   But, looking ahead... if we are already leading the league in dead money for 2023, while not competing in 2022... what's the point in kicking the can now?  It just means that we've tied our hands in the future to make competing then as hard as it is now.   It is just prolonging the agony.  The opportunity existed to rip off the band-aid of the cap strapped situation and work to truly dig out of it.  All that's been done is smear it out over 4 years (so far).  It might grow beyond that still.

Confusing tweet. Why do they need the cap space after the most expensive part of the off-season has just past (with no real young talent needing to be extended)? 
 

Nonsensical tweet following a nonsensical move by the Eagles.

2 minutes ago, greend said:

I'm fine bringing back Cox. 

Yeah we all know how much you love Cox old timer. 

32 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

All of the sudden turnarounds are about the QB.

TB - Brady
Cincy - Burrow
LAC - Herbert

 

Now we have $40M+ a year guaranteed as a baseline.

 

It's all about the QB.

This is why I want the Eagles to draft a QB.  IMO we already know our current QB is on a Tyrod Taylor trajectory, and while the price tag for proven QBs are escalating at an alarming rate, the CBA-mandated price for drafted QBs stays very low in comparison — and they’re cost-controlled for 5 years, with the optionality to franchise tag them for an additional year.

The odds are 70% or more you’re not going to be successful in developing a franchise QB, but let’s bring in a guy with more tangibles to work with, please.

This is so underwhelming to read 

5 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

This is so underwhelming to read 

I've got no problem with that, but they are trying to play both sides.  Either spend money on the future or spend it on now.  Clearly they can't spend it on now, so they should only be spending on players that will be prime contributors in 2024 and beyond.

5 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

This is why I want the Eagles to draft a QB.  IMO we already know our current QB is on a Tyrod Taylor trajectory, and while the price tag for proven QBs are escalating at an alarming rate, the CBA-mandated price for drafted QBs stays very low in comparison — and they’re cost-controlled for 5 years, with the optionality to franchise tag them for an additional year.

The odds are 70% or more you’re not going to be successful in developing a franchise QB, but let’s bring in a guy with more tangibles to work with, please.

That 5 year window at a low cost is a huge advantage like the Bengals have/had with Burrow.  

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

This is so underwhelming to read 

It is, but I think Garafolo is doing some supposing and rationalizing here on what he thinks the Eagles overall strategy is.

According to Spotrac they now have $27.7M in available cap space, and I’m guessing a WR signing is coming.  Either that, or they just made cap room for a Mayfield-Hurts straight across trade 

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

This is so underwhelming to read 

While true to a certain extent (Mailata, Goedert and to a lesser extent Sweat were must-signs), I think it’s spin from the organization because they missed out on Ridley and Williams.

All that’s really left is the tier 3 guys. I just wish we added a better safety. There were so many good options in the age-range we wanted. Chark would have been great at his cost too, otherwise the WRs were paid stupidly.

There are starting-level players left at corner and linebacker. 

Just now, Alphagrand said:

It is, but I think Garafolo is doing some supposing and rationalizing here on what he thinks the Eagles overall strategy is.

According to Spotrac they now have $27.7M in available cap space, and I’m guessing a WR signing is coming.  Either that, or they just made cap room for a Mayfield-Hurts straight across trade 

I think he’s spouting the company line. He’s tight with the Eagles. 

 

I suspect we will see some second and third tier signings in the next few weeks by the Eagles.

4 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

It is, but I think Garafolo is doing some supposing and rationalizing here on what he thinks the Eagles overall strategy is.

According to Spotrac they now have $27.7M in available cap space, and I’m guessing a WR signing is coming.  Either that, or they just made cap room for a Mayfield-Hurts straight across trade 

Ugh... just roll that money over to 2023 and get out of this horrible cycle.

 

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I've got no problem with that, but they are trying to play both sides.  Either spend money on the future or spend it on now.  Clearly they can't spend it on now, so they should only be spending on players that will be prime contributors in 2024 and beyond.

I don’t have a problem with the retaining their own young guys. Cox should not be "an important order of business.” I just want them to commit to an actual rebuild. I think Howie and Lurie severely overrate their roster with some of these moves like Cox and Harris.

3 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

It is, but I think Garafolo is doing some supposing and rationalizing here on what he thinks the Eagles overall strategy is.

According to Spotrac they now have $27.7M in available cap space, and I’m guessing a WR signing is coming.  Either that, or they just made cap room for a Mayfield-Hurts straight across trade 

Could you see the NFL ever changing the cap to more of an NBA type that allows teams to go over the cap for re-signing their own players?   I know you they have comp picks now, but with QB’s now getting nearly 25% of the cap, it going to more difficult to keep veterans on the team that drafted them.  

4 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I suspect we will see some second and third tier signings in the next few weeks by the Eagles.

Well of course, they still need to fill out the roster and we don’t have starters at certain positions on defense.

Still been an odd way to attack an off-season for a team that is much closer than many think.

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I don’t have a problem with the retaining their own young guys. Cox should not be "an important order of business.” I just want them to commit to an actual rebuild. I think Howie and Lurie severely overrate their roster with some of these moves like Cox and Harris.

Exactly.

2 minutes ago, The Blackfish said:

Could you see the NFL ever changing the cap to more of an NBA type that allows teams to go over the cap for re-signing their own players?   I know you they have comp picks now, but with QB’s now getting nearly 25% of the cap, it going to more difficult to keep veterans on the team that drafted them.  

Should just go the NBA route of a 'max contract' instead.