6 minutes ago, austinfan said:

And who are they going to be paying big money to?

Smith and this year's 1st rd picks don't come due until 2025 (his fifth year) or later.

If some later picks have to be resigned b/c they outplayed their draft spot, well, that's not exactly a problem.😎

Unless of course you want to sign 3 free agents to big money contracts.

You keep coming back to this like it helps to build support for Howie's case.  The fact that the roster is low on talent doesn't help defend the job Howie has done.

BTW... $65M for the remaining 35 players isn't a lot to work with.  That would be an average of less than $2M per roster position.... not counting the extra money for IR player replacements, etc.   In other words, Howie will kick the can forward again to make that room available.

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

You keep coming back to this like it helps to build support for Howie's case.  The fact that the roster is low on talent doesn't help defend the job Howie has done.

BTW... $65M for the remaining 35 players isn't a lot to work with.  That would be an average of less than $2M per roster position.... not counting the extra money for IR player replacements, etc.   In other words, Howie will kick the can forward again to make that room available.

 

1 hour ago, downundermike said:

Not trying to bust your balls, but I hate when people use this statement.  The projected 65 million in 2024 cap room with 18 players under contract is based on the projected 256 million cap for 2024.  The number will come in somewhere close to that, but more than likely not any higher than that.

All of these projections are based on what the cap is projected to be, and this year came in exactly what it was projected.

I understand. I don't think that $65 million is taking into account the Brandon Brooks retiring and Kelce's likely retirement.  I also think they look at extending Smith and potentially Hargrave that season.  It looks like they will have 27 players under contract for the start of 2024.  That includes Lane Johnson and Slay who are not likely to be on the roster at that point.  I am not saying they are in great cap shape.  I just think projecting their space is difficult.  I am not sure that it means anything, however, if they draft well and can obtain a franchise QB.  

12 minutes ago, austinfan said:

The Giants? How could they be out of cap room? Don't you have to have talented players that command real salaries to get into that kind of trouble?

Or have a moron for a GM.  

39 minutes ago, downundermike said:

They tried to do everything they could. 

22 minutes ago, austinfan said:

And who are they going to be paying big money to?

Smith and this year's 1st rd picks don't come due until 2025 (his fifth year) or later.

If some later picks have to be resigned b/c they outplayed their draft spot, well, that's not exactly a problem.😎

Unless of course you want to sign 3 free agents to big money contracts.

Well I was incorrect, it is 65 million in room with 17 players under contract.  Lets look at the depth chart and find out where we would need to spend money. 

Currently the Eagles need 7 starters for the 2024 season, and that is just to fill the starting spots, and looking at the depth chart below, they actually need 10 starters.

Due to constant draft failures, bad free agent deals, and all of Howie's gross mismanagement, this roster will be in shambles in two years, and we are having to rely on him drafting to fix it.  Seeing as those of us with even the slightest intelligence know that will not happen, and because it is how the league works, you need to sprinkle in free agents.  Marcus Williams would have solved the safety problem for the next 4-5 years.  There were several free agents that we could have signed that would fill the holes on this 2024 roster.

**** Edited to add, there is no one from the 2019 - 2020 draft class worth re signing to fill any of these holes.  Maybe Driscoll for depth, but that's it.

 

12 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

You keep coming back to this like it helps to build support for Howie's case.  The fact that the roster is low on talent doesn't help defend the job Howie has done.

BTW... $65M for the remaining 35 players isn't a lot to work with.  That would be an average of less than $2M per roster position.... not counting the extra money for IR player replacements, etc.   In other words, Howie will kick the can forward again to make that room available.

I don't mind the debate about cap space but the question I have is when has cap space kept a team from competing? I am not for bad signings and extensions but at the same time I don't think cap space matters in terms of team building.  

7 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

I understand. I don't think that $65 million is taking into account the Brandon Brooks retiring and Kelce's likely retirement.  I also think they look at extending Smith and potentially Hargrave that season.  It looks like they will have 27 players under contract for the start of 2024.  That includes Lane Johnson and Slay who are not likely to be on the roster at that point.  I am not saying they are in great cap shape.  I just think projecting their space is difficult.  I am not sure that it means anything, however, if they draft well and can obtain a franchise QB.  

Or the converse... they don't draft well and can't obtain a franchise QB.  

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Well I was incorrect, it is 65 million in room with 17 players under contract.  Lets look at the depth chart and find out where we would need to spend money. 

Currently the Eagles need 7 starters for the 2024 season, and that is just to fill the starting spots, and looking at the depth chart below, they actually need 10 starters.

Due to constant draft failures, bad free agent deals, and all of Howie's gross mismanagement, this roster will be in shambles in two years, and we are having to rely on him drafting to fix it.  Seeing as those of us with even the slightest intelligence know that will not happen, and because it is how the league works, you need to sprinkle in free agents.  Marcus Williams would have solved the safety problem for the next 4-5 years.  There were several free agents that we could have signed that would fill the holes on this 2024 roster.

Where's the evidence that the Eagles didn't sign someone because of cap space? 

2 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

I don't mind the debate about cap space but the question I have is when has cap space kept a team from competing? I am not for bad signings and extensions but at the same time I don't think cap space matters in terms of team building.  

It does when you want to sign Marcus Williams and don't have that little bit extra to seal the deal.  Or you have to roll with the crap that they signed to one year deals last year to 'fill the gaps'.   It matters.   Drafting well matters more.   Howie failed at both.

1 hour ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Nate Newton would take us back almost 30 years.   So in 3 decades, the answer is less than half a dozen.  Doesn't sound very 'often' to me.  Sounds to me like they are the outlier.

 

Thanks for providing some names.

Uh, how many Allpro guards are there? Since there are numerous repeat offenders (guys like Yanda, Martin, Faneca, etc) it's a pretty small number to start with.

And note, a player who makes multiple all pro in his early 30s can still be above average at 35, even if no longer elite.  Bold is first team.

Yanda (31, 32, 34, 35) - last season at 35

Mathis (31, 32) - started 12 games at 34

Waters (33, 34) - last season at 34, refused to report at 35

Hutchinson (30, 31, 32) - 11, 14, 12 starts from 33-35

Faneca (30, 31, 32, 33) - last season at 34

Shields (31, 32, 33, 35) - last season at 35

Rivera (31, 32) - last season at 34

Note that the top OGs mostly played at a high level until age 34-35, and a couple retired at the top of their game.

Kelce (34)

Mawae (30, 31, 37)

 

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

It does when you want to sign Marcus Williams and don't have that little bit extra to seal the deal.  Or you have to roll with the crap that they signed to one year deals last year to 'fill the gaps'.   It matters.   Drafting well matters more.   Howie failed at both.

That little extra means "overpay." Because if you value a player properly, you should have a reservation price that's the maximum you should pay.

If you consistently exceed that reservation price, guess what, you're going to be in cap hell.

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Or the converse... they don't draft well and can't obtain a franchise QB.  

I don't think a bunch of cap space fixes that either. Teams aren't competing by signing big time free agents as much as trading or drafting them once they have a QB. 

Plus, since the cap is projected to rise the rest of the decade (based on contracts already signed by the league), everyone is kicking the can forward.

Or how does NO have cap room?

6 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Well I was incorrect, it is 65 million in room with 17 players under contract.  Lets look at the depth chart and find out where we would need to spend money. 

Currently the Eagles need 7 starters for the 2024 season, and that is just to fill the starting spots, and looking at the depth chart below, they actually need 10 starters.

Due to constant draft failures, bad free agent deals, and all of Howie's gross mismanagement, this roster will be in shambles in two years, and we are having to rely on him drafting to fix it.  Seeing as those of us with even the slightest intelligence know that will not happen, and because it is how the league works, you need to sprinkle in free agents.  Marcus Williams would have solved the safety problem for the next 4-5 years.  There were several free agents that we could have signed that would fill the holes on this 2024 roster.

**** Edited to add, there is no one from the 2019 - 2020 draft class worth re signing to fill any of these holes.  Maybe Driscoll for depth, but that's it.

 

They'll draft 5 starters, minimum, over the next 2 years.  They'll have 1 rookie starter from the 2024 draft.  They'll sign about 3 others.  

Between now and the 2024 season, we'll have 5 first round picks, 3 seconds, and the usual mid-round stuff.  That will generate 5 starters, at least.  That doesn't mean they'll be any good or it won't be a disaster.  But the unchallenged paths to the starting lineup will be there for the picks.  They'll play.  And the Eagles' record will reflect if they were good picks or not.

 

 

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

They'll draft 5 starters, minimum, over the next 2 years.  They'll have 1 rookie starter from the 2024 draft.  They'll sign about 3 others.  

Between now and the 2024 season, we'll have 5 first round picks, 3 seconds, and the usual mid-round stuff.  That will generate 5 starters, at least.  That doesn't mean they'll be any good or it won't be a disaster.  But the unchallenged paths to the starting lineup will be there for the picks.  They'll play.  And the Eagles' record will reflect if they were good picks or not

 

Based on the fact that only 1 player from the 2019 and 2020 class should be re signed ( Driscoll ) and he is a depth lineman, not a starter, I do not feel good about how the 2024 roster will look if we are relying on draft picks.

The good news, Howie will be in the cross hairs, and when it does not work out, hopefully he is shown the door.

Just now, downundermike said:

Based on the fact that only 1 player from the 2019 and 2020 class should be re signed ( Driscoll ) and he is a depth lineman, not a starter, I do not feel good about how the 2024 roster will look if we are relying on draft picks.

The good news, Howie will be in the cross hairs, and when it does not work out, hopefully he is shown the door.

I'd argue that Driscoll should not be re-signed 🤣. 

14 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Well I was incorrect, it is 65 million in room with 17 players under contract.  Lets look at the depth chart and find out where we would need to spend money. 

Currently the Eagles need 7 starters for the 2024 season, and that is just to fill the starting spots, and looking at the depth chart below, they actually need 10 starters.

Due to constant draft failures, bad free agent deals, and all of Howie's gross mismanagement, this roster will be in shambles in two years, and we are having to rely on him drafting to fix it.  Seeing as those of us with even the slightest intelligence know that will not happen, and because it is how the league works, you need to sprinkle in free agents.  Marcus Williams would have solved the safety problem for the next 4-5 years.  There were several free agents that we could have signed that would fill the holes on this 2024 roster.

**** Edited to add, there is no one from the 2019 - 2020 draft class worth re signing to fill any of these holes.  Maybe Driscoll for depth, but that's it.

 

 

Dude....slow down....I haven't opened the 2024 Blog yet.  

3 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

 

Dude....slow down....I haven't opened the 2024 Blog yet.  

8 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

It does when you want to sign Marcus Williams and don't have that little bit extra to seal the deal.  Or you have to roll with the crap that they signed to one year deals last year to 'fill the gaps'.   It matters.   Drafting well matters more.   Howie failed at both.

The Eagles were reportedly able to offer a competitive bid.  I don't think it was money that kept him from coming here.  It may have been an amount the Eagles were unwilling to pay for the position.  

Just to discuss Willis for a second...

Pros...big arm, exciting athlete, nice upside.  

Cons...short, was never THAT impressive against poor competition.

Yeah yea Drew Brees.  I'm not saying Willis CAN'T be great.  But he's just not enough of a check all the boxes prospect to justify a marriage-like commitment.  That's reserved for prospects who are simply much better than him.  I'd love to have him here to coach him up and see where it goes, but I'm not making an investment where the Eagles are in a position that he HAS to succeed.  He's not that kind of prospect.  

2 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Uh, how many Allpro guards are there? Since there are numerous repeat offenders (guys like Yanda, Martin, Faneca, etc) it's a pretty small number to start with.

And note, a player who makes multiple all pro in his early 30s can still be above average at 35, even if no longer elite.  Bold is first team.

Yanda (31, 32, 34, 35) - last season at 35

Mathis (31, 32) - started 12 games at 34

Waters (33, 34) - last season at 34, refused to report at 35

Hutchinson (30, 31, 32) - 11, 14, 12 starts from 33-35

Faneca (30, 31, 32, 33) - last season at 34

Shields (31, 32, 33, 35) - last season at 35

Rivera (31, 32) - last season at 34

Note that the top OGs mostly played at a high level until age 34-35, and a couple retired at the top of their game.

Kelce (34)

Mawae (30, 31, 37)

That's a nice list.  How many of them had an Achilles tear?   32 is not 35, btw... So, that eliminates Mathis, Hutchinson and Rivera.  Kelce is not an OG, nor was Mawae.  Centers are a different story than OGs.   (Mathis also had very little wear and tear on his body by the time he hit 30 compared to most top level OGs, because he was a backup for so long and only became a starter/All-Pro with Chip and Howard Mudd's OL style of pulling OGs a ton.

 

Please note that the biggest factor in these OGs is the ability to remain healthy.  And the contract given to Brooks was after major injuries had already been racked up.  

Shields - ZERO games missed in full career
Faneca - missed TWO games in full career
Rivera - Three games missed full career.
Waters - clean bill of health.
Yanda - clean bill of health from 25 - 32.

Meanwhile, Brooks had already suffered a season ending tricep injury one year, and a torn Achilles in another year, with TWO YEARS left on his current contract when Howie decided to re-do his contract and make him the HIGHEST PAID OG, not with games played bonuses, just guaranteed money with void years.   It was a stupid contract to give to a guy that had just suffered TWO major injuries in the years leading up to the extension AND having years left on his current deal.   Howie gambled and Howie lost.    Those OGs that last at a very high level well into their mid-30s are the ones that manage to avoid the injury bug.  Plain and simple.  And the ones that don't... don't last.   Brooks played in TWO games after the season that he signed that extension.  TWO.   I thought it was a bad risk when it happened, and the outcome defies even my predictions of what Brooks would be able to do.  TWO games played for how many million?   Bad luck?  No.  Bad analysis of the risk involved.  

13 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

I don't think a bunch of cap space fixes that either. Teams aren't competing by signing big time free agents as much as trading or drafting them once they have a QB. 

It definitely does not.  But the bad drafting has helped exacerbate the bad cap situation.

12 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

They'll draft 5 starters, minimum, over the next 2 years.  They'll have 1 rookie starter from the 2024 draft.  They'll sign about 3 others.  

Between now and the 2024 season, we'll have 5 first round picks, 3 seconds, and the usual mid-round stuff.  That will generate 5 starters, at least.  That doesn't mean they'll be any good or it won't be a disaster.  But the unchallenged paths to the starting lineup will be there for the picks.  They'll play.  And the Eagles' record will reflect if they were good picks or not.

That actually depresses me a little.

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

That actually depresses me a little.

Until proven otherwise, it depresses me too.  We won the SB with the Rams blueprint...FA, trades, and some core veteran picks sprinkled in.  

Might not be the most reproducible blueprint, but it has worked in the past.  Trusting Howie to build a roster through the draft is a major leap of faith.

17 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

They'll draft 5 starters, minimum, over the next 2 years.  They'll have 1 rookie starter from the 2024 draft.  They'll sign about 3 others.  

Between now and the 2024 season, we'll have 5 first round picks, 3 seconds, and the usual mid-round stuff.  That will generate 5 starters, at least.  That doesn't mean they'll be any good or it won't be a disaster.  But the unchallenged paths to the starting lineup will be there for the picks.  They'll play.  And the Eagles' record will reflect if they were good picks or not.

 

 

2017 starters that were on the 2015 roster.  () indicates didn't play in the SB.

6 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

The Eagles were reportedly able to offer a competitive bid.  I don't think it was money that kept him from coming here.  It may have been an amount the Eagles were unwilling to pay for the position.  

That's possible.  But an interesting thing happens when you have money.  In those cases where you are bidding against someone, you can boost your offer a bit to seal the deal when you aren't feeling pinched.  That doesn't make it the right move, but it does limit optionality.  

When it comes to FA and signing a hot 25 year on the market, it usually comes down to overpaying.  That's the price to play in that game.   I don't recommend doing it for a lot of players... but I do think its necessary in some cases.    Back in the day, the Eagles made Jon Runyan the highest paid OT in the NFL in free agency... because they desperately wanted to upgrade a foundational position (OT), and the fact that he was a RT and not a LT didn't matter to them.  They overpaid and they fixed that position for the life of his contract.   Good move, but one that was likely viewed as an overpay by other teams around the league for a RT.  In FA you have to overpay sometimes.  But, you need to be smart about when and where and for whom you do it.  Runyan was a smart move.   Not sure Williams would have been or wouldn't... but the Eagles have a cavern of a hole at S, both spots.  He'd have been a massive upgrade over what they have there and might have been the answer to the problem for the life of that contract.  Which, to me, is the goal of FA.  If you have a massive hole and can fill it with a stud for the next 5-6 years... you do it and then you can focus other resources to fill in the more minor spots.  OL, and specifically the OTs, was that for Andy.  Having a safety on the backend that Gannon could trust might make a world of difference for this defense.  Who knows?