4 minutes ago, Doc S. said:

"On the cusp of a Dynasty", "Next Patriots Profile"... set up for years to come, Blah blah blah....

I think "they" have it backwards. WE are the team to beat.

While I agree we are the team to beat, dynasty talk applies more to the Chiefs than the Eagles.

Since Mahomes became the starter

2018 - AFCCG loss

2019 - Super Bowl win

2020 - Super Bowl loss

2021 - AFCCG loss

2022 - in the Super Bowl

So the Chiefs have been to the AFCCG at a minimum for 5 straight years.

 

The Eagles since Hurts became the starter

2021 - WC loss

2022 - in the Super Bowl

This Eagles team has a lot of similarities to 2017, 2nd year starting QB, 2nd year HC and Howie hit on a bunch of FA signing.  Now we will see if Howie can do what he was unable to do after Super Bowl 52, keep the team in place to be back again with the same core and compete for another title.  It was an epic fail the first time.

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

While I agree we are the team to beat, dynasty talk applies more to the Chiefs than the Eagles.

Since Mahomes became the starter

2018 - AFCCG loss

2019 - Super Bowl win

2020 - Super Bowl loss

2021 - AFCCG loss

2022 - in the Super Bowl

So the Chiefs have been to the AFCCG at a minimum for 5 straight years.

 

The Eagles since Hurts became the starter

2021 - WC loss

2022 - in the Super Bowl

This Eagles team has a lot of similarities to 2017, 2nd year starting QB, 2nd year HC and Howie hit on a bunch of FA signing.  Now we will see if Howie can do what he was unable to do after Super Bowl 52, keep the team in place to be back again with the same core and compete for another title.  It was an epic fail the first time.

That's fair.

My point was simply, Send the Chiefs home defeated, enhance our own story.

10 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Take a look at the prorations left on his deal, you’re missing something.

8.1m 2023

5.6m 2024

3.2 2025

1.2m 2026

 

Those are monies already paid to Brandon in signing bonuses and restructures that act like signing bonuses for cap purposes. If Brandon leaves the team as you say on a voided deal, all of those accelerate. It can’t be only 9m, we cannot get out of those. He will be an 18m$ cap charge in 2023 if he leaves.

Youre confusing it with his cap number if he stays, which would be 9m. But that’s a bogus number because the contract automatically voids. Let me know if this makes sense, and I can show you how bringing him back can reduce the DE#1 cap number

I am not confused at all.  All those numbers you listed are never going away.

If he is gone this year, they all apply to this years cap for a total of 18.3 million.

If they sign him to a new deal, his 1.5 million base will be replaced with his new contract amount, and the 2024-2026 void years will stay as is, and possibly have a new signing bonus pro ration added to them with a new contract.

Jason at OTC confirmed this in an email discussion we had.

2 minutes ago, Doc S. said:

That's fair.

My point was simply, Send the Chiefs home defeated, enhance our own story.

Agreed.

But Hurts Eagles team would need to make the next 4 NFCCG to be considered in the same breath as Mahomes Chiefs.

13 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yeah but.... where are the explosions?!  

 

Ironically, my wife caught me watching Indiana Jones and the Lost Ark... and her comment was... "hmm... they used stunts rather than special effects, and this movie actually really holds up well."   Which is actually really true, until the very end... its all stunts and acting.   Great piece of cinema.  

Love raiders of the lost Ark and Indiana Jones and Spielberg and if you take Indiana Jones out of that movie nothing changes at all...😉

11 hours ago, ManuManu said:

 

If they aren't going after any coaches in the SB then I don't see why they don't just hire him now

3 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Agreed.

But Hurts Eagles team would need to make the next 4 NFCCG to be considered in the same breath as Mahomes Chiefs.

So, what's the problem?

13 minutes ago, downundermike said:

I am not confused at all.  All those numbers you listed are never going away.

If he is gone this year, they all apply to this years cap for a total of 18.3 million.

If they sign him to a new deal, his 1.5 million base will be replaced with his new contract amount, and the 2024-2026 void years will stay as is, and possibly have a new signing bonus pro ration added to them with a new contract.

Jason at OTC confirmed this in an email discussion we had.

Right, so he’s 18m$ if we void his deal as is expected. Let’s say we get a 1st round rookie to start. If we brought Brandon back we still likely take that rookie DE, but since in the absentee Brandon scenario the rookie is starting, so we can replace Brandon’s roster spot with a reserve player. Let’s say hypothetically we get a veteran at 5m$, someone on the cheap, but undoubtedly inferior to even 35yr old BG.

that roster spot between Brandon’s dead money and the veteran is 21m$. However, had we not signed the veteran and instead brought Brandon back, his prorations do not accelerate and he is only at ~8m before salary (remaining signing bonus and restructure proration for 2023 alone). His salary can be anything below 15m$ (which it should be much lower) and we will save money on the 2023 salary cap by keeping him.

The downside is the accelerated prorations are still there in 2024 at 10m$, but who knows, maybe he plays 2 more years for further helping that dead cap number. Even without that though, this would allow us another year of trying to get back to where we were in 2022, not only by not needing to add an inferior DE, but freeing up more money for other positions.

My file crashed but I'm pretty good at saving it. I went back the past day and didn't see any missing but if I am, let me know

23 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yeah but.... where are the explosions?!  

 

Ironically, my wife caught me watching Indiana Jones and the Lost Ark... and her comment was... "hmm... they used stunts rather than special effects, and this movie actually really holds up well."   Which is actually really true, until the very end... its all stunts and acting.   Great piece of cinema.  

Did you not see the torrents of blood spraying into the air on the initial whale hunt? Looked explosive to me...

1956, remember... 

3 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

that roster spot between Brandon’s dead money and the veteran is 21m$. However, had we not signed the veteran and instead brought Brandon back, his prorations do not accelerate and he is only at ~7m before salary (remaining signing bonus and restructure proration for 2023 alone). His salary can be anything below 14m (which it should be much lower) and we will save money on the 2023 salary cap by by keeping him.

No, we are not going to be able to save money.

His proration of 8.163 million is not going away in any scenario.  

To erase the guarantees kicking in, they have to sign him to a new deal before the second day of the new league year.  If they sign him to a new contract, all of the numbers in red stay in place.

Give me a new contract, base salaries and signing bonus and I will show you what will happen.

 

38 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Eagles who can win their second title on Sunday.  Kind of strange that only 5 years later, only 6 of 25 starters ( including ST ) will play in this game.

 

Jason Kelce

Lane Johnson

Brandon Graham

Fletcher Cox

Jake Elliott

Rick Lovato

Isaac Seumalo ( 10 snaps in 2017 )

Derek Barnett ( will not play in this Super Bowl )

 

Am I missing anyone ??

 

Linval Joseph & Suh

Edit: Nvm, thought you meant any current Eagle, not from 2017 team

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

No, we are not going to be able to save money.

His proration of 8.163 million is not going away in any scenario.  

To erase the guarantees kicking in, they have to sign him to a new deal before the second day of the new league year.  If they sign him to a new contract, all of the numbers in red stay in place.

Give me a new contract, base salaries and signing bonus and I will show you what will happen.

 

1 year league minimum 

1 minute ago, TorontoEagle said:

1 year league minimum 

@LeanMeanGM Chiefs 24 Eagles 29

Bonus: Hurts MVP

 

10 minutes ago, downundermike said:

No, we are not going to be able to save money.

His proration of 8.163 million is not going away in any scenario.  

To erase the guarantees kicking in, they have to sign him to a new deal before the second day of the new league year.  If they sign him to a new contract, all of the numbers in red stay in place.

Give me a new contract, base salaries and signing bonus and I will show you what will happen.

 

 

2023 cap hit if he’s voided as expected:

18m$ in all accelerated prorations

 

2023 cap hit if he signs a 1 year, fully guaranteed at signing 7m$ salary (not signing bonus) to replace the 1.5m$ base salary he was set for:

7+8.1m$ = 15m$ 2023 cap hit, we save 3 million that year, not even counting the money we save by not replacing him with another player’s contract. And thus we take a 10m$ proration cap hit in 2024 if he retires, which he may not, and if not we can then reduce/delay that number too and push a little more to 2025.

 

How different would your numbers look on a fully guaranteed 7m non signing bonus for 2023?

 

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

Love me sum Donna. She's great.

2 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

 

2023 cap hit if he’s voided as expected:

18m$ in all accelerated prorations

 

2023 cap hit if he signs a 1 year, fully guaranteed at signing 7m$ salary (not signing bonus) to replace the 1.5m$ base salary he was set for:

7+8.1m$ = 15m$ 2023 cap hit, we save 3 million that year, not even counting the money we save by not replacing him with another player’s contract. And thus we take a 10m$ proration cap hit in 2024 if he retires, which we may not, which we can then reduce that number too and push a little more to 2025.

 

How different would your numbers look on a fully guaranteed 7m non signing bonus for 2023?

 

Here is the part you are missing.  When we sign him to a new deal, the void years do not accelerate, they stay as is. 

The void years only accelerate if the deal expires or is voided.  When you sign a player to a new contract before the current one expires the void years stay in place.

But I have a spreadsheet ready to go, so just to clarify, you are signing Graham to a new deal

 

7 million dollar 1 year deal, with no signing bonus ??

 

3 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Here is the part you are missing.  When we sign him to a new deal, the void years do not accelerate, they stay as is. 

The void years only accelerate if the deal expires or is voided.  When you sign a player to a new contract before the current one expires the void years stay in place.

But I have a spreadsheet ready to go, so just to clarify, you are signing Graham to a new deal

 

7 million dollar 1 year deal, with no signing bonus ??

 

Yes

1 minute ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Yes

I think we are both driving at the same point, just from different perspectives.

And there is no way Graham would sign that deal to stay, as he actually loses something by removing those guarantees that kick in for 2023 and 2024.

I would think he would have to sign a 2 year deal, with a signing bonus of some type.

So, do you think a two year deal, 15 million total with a 10 million signing bonus is unreasonable, based on his previous extension ??

Matchups with McKinnon and Pacheco could be a handful. Those guys concern me. 

Alright, since I was ****ing about Fanatics, I thought I should provide an surprising update.  They said my stuff wouldn't get here until 2/15, but it just arrived today!!  Perfect timing!  

Just now, E-A-G-L-E-S Eagles said:

Matchups with McKinnon and Pacheco could be a handful. Those guys concern me. 

Meh. I'm only worried about Mahomes/Kelce.

My concern while on defense, besides the Mahomes magic and Kelce over the middle, is the screen game. I imagine they’re going to run a lot of screens early, even some TE screens. The defense needs to be ready to cover underneath and actually tackle when they get there.