NoSaint Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 The Iggles are really putting some money down. How far under the cap are they? How confident are they that they have enough talent for continued success? Their team was not that impressive this year and barely made the playoffs. ESPN - Eagles ink WR Riley Cooper to 5-year, $25M deal, C Jason Kelce to 6-year, $37.5M deal, sources tell ESPN i think cap space wise they are in a similar spot when compared to us. i want to say about 20m in space before all this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 This crying about Peters makes sense. We used to go 7-9 when he was here. Now we only go 6-10. The Eagles have won a ton of playoff games with Peters. They beat the Bills a few years ago with Peters. The Bills didn't find a good LT in the 2nd round a few years ago. We didn't draft a starting C and a captain with a pick from the Peters' trade. Jason Peters had his business like a professional and the Bills are 100% at fault. I hate this team so much yet I come here everyday to talk about how terrible I think they are. You can parse and rationalize any individual player move over the last decade and make it sound reasonable from a team's standpoint. You can also find consolation that every team and every GM misfire on draft picks or free agents. But that's not the point here. Peters is just one example in a long string of moves that turned out badly for the organization, and that string of doing more things wrong than right is why this is the 3rd worst franchise in winning percentage over the last 14 years. Peters, Russell Wilson, etc points have been over-debated for a long time, and there's a common thread to all of them - Bills haven't been good in getting and keeping quality players to build the foundation. More often than not, they were using picks to replace self imposed holes. That's not how successful franchises operate. For the first time in a long time there seems to be a cohesive strategy between the coach and the GM. Unfortunately, it looks like the usual gatekeeper behind the curtain doesn't want to change his ways. If the Byrd situation is truly a battle between Whaley & Overdorf, and not between Bills & Parker, then we the fans are bigger suckers than I thought we were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) Albert Breer @AlbertBreer 5m On offense alone, Eagles have Peters, McCoy, Jackson, Herremans, Cooper, Kelce, Johnson, Mathis and Celek signed for next three years Albert Breer @AlbertBreer 14m RE: Philly cap space ... This is the freedom you get having your QB at the cap #'s they have Foles at -- $770,880 this year, $815,880 next. Albert Breer @AlbertBreer 8m Eagles' final piece is getting Jeremy Maclin done. Was told last night characterization of it being close was off, but sides are talking. I'm impressed with the Eagles this week! Edited February 27, 2014 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 The problem with letting Peters go is what happened after that as tried to replace him. Bringing in Dockery & then trying Walker @ LT. How much money did they flush down the toilet on those 2 guys. That money could of easily been used to keep Peters here & happy. No you draft Glenn & you got your bookend tackles that could be compared favorably to just about any pair of tackles in the league. When you hit on a rookie free agent in most cases you should try to keep him. Peters had every right to demand top tackle money, he was one of the top tackles in the league & apparently still is. The way the Bills do business has them spinning their wheels every year. They let a guy like Clements go & use their top pick to replace him the next year. Trade Lynch & they use3 a pick on Spiller. Don't be surprised if they let Byrd walk they use their top pick on the safety from Alabama. The problemwith doing this is you are never building a tea your always just replacing guys. Are you going to over pay some guys, absolutely, but that is the price of being a winning franchise, which clearly the Bills are not. 1) Dockery and Walker weren't great but they were part of unit that set a franchise record for sacks. 2) Peters acted like a child after getting a new deal and showed up out of shape. They got Wood for him. Now we have Glenn. LT is a very overvalued position. 3) Is it the Bills fault Lynch acted like an idiot and was one more incident from a year long suspension? The Bills have made plenty of mistakes the last 14 years. IMO, whining about Peters and Lynch makes no sense. We found good replacements and both players deserve a big share of the blame. We have to overanalyze everything. If the Bills found a legit QB, no one care about Lynch or Peters 3 years after the fact. Ryan Clady, IMO the best LT, got hurt and the Broncos made the playoffs. You can parse and rationalize any individual player move over the last decade and make it sound reasonable from a team's standpoint. You can also find consolation that every team and every GM misfire on draft picks or free agents. But that's not the point here. Peters is just one example in a long string of moves that turned out badly for the organization, and that string of doing more things wrong than right is why this is the 3rd worst franchise in winning percentage over the last 14 years. Peters, Russell Wilson, etc points have been over-debated for a long time, and there's a common thread to all of them - Bills haven't been good in getting and keeping quality players to build the foundation. More often than not, they were using picks to replace self imposed holes. That's not how successful franchises operate. For the first time in a long time there seems to be a cohesive strategy between the coach and the GM. Unfortunately, it looks like the usual gatekeeper behind the curtain doesn't want to change his ways. If the Byrd situation is truly a battle between Whaley & Overdorf, and not between Bills & Parker, then we the fans are bigger suckers than I thought we were. If the Bills lucked into Brady, no one would care about any of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) 1) Dockery and Walker weren't great but they were part of unit that set a franchise record for sacks. 2) Peters acted like a child after getting a new deal and showed up out of shape. They got Wood for him. Now we have Glenn. LT is a very overvalued position. If it's a very overvalued position, why did the two Super Bowl teams this year spend top ten picks on the position? The second best team in the league, the Niners, spent a 1st on Staley too - the 17th pick overall. The Pats also spent a first on their LT (again, the 17th pick overall). The crux of your argument rests on the claim that it's an overvalued position. If the four best teams in the league are a reliable gauge of football acumen, then you're completely wrong. As for Manning and the Broncos, Manning was terrible if he held the ball for 3 seconds plus this year. In the Pats regular season game, for instance, he was 0-8 with 2 INTs and not TDs on the plays he held it for 3 seconds plus (he was 19-28 with 2 TDs and no INTs on the other plays). The thing about Manning is that he gets rid of it so quickly that mediocre line play isn't a huge problem -- unless they're facing a team like the Seahawks that can exploit a weak LT while covering his receivers. As for the Seahawks, their offense (and especially Wilson) noticeably declined over the course of the second half of this past season -- i.e., in the games that Okung didn't play in plus the playoffs. Obviously, their defense was dominant, and they could overcome it. But that doesn't mean that the LT isn't important. For the year, Seattle averaged 339 ypg, but in the final seven games including the playoffs, they only averaged 283. Edited February 27, 2014 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckinny Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I can only hope Foles blows up the offense this year and wants a raise! Then we will see how all these signings helped the eagles! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I can only hope Foles blows up the offense this year and wants a raise! Then we will see how all these signings helped the eagles! yea - they totally shouldve cut all the offensive talent, so their qb wouldnt have to get paid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 If it's a very overvalued position, why did the two Super Bowl teams this year spend top ten picks on the position? The second best team in the league, the Niners, spent a 1st on Staley too - the 17th pick overall. The Pats also spent a first on their LT (again, the 17th pick overall). The crux of your argument rests on the claim that it's an overvalued position. If the four best teams in the league are a reliable gauge of football acumen, then you're completely wrong. As for Manning and the Broncos, Manning was terrible if he held the ball for 3 seconds plus this year. In the Pats regular season game, for instance, he was 0-8 with 2 INTs and not TDs on the plays he held it for 3 seconds plus (he was 19-28 with 2 TDs and no INTs on the other plays). The thing about Manning is that he gets rid of it so quickly that mediocre line play isn't a huge problem -- unless they're facing a team like the Seahawks that can exploit a weak LT while covering his receivers. As for the Seahawks, their offense (and especially Wilson) noticeably declined over the course of the second half of this past season -- i.e., in the games that Okung didn't play in plus the playoffs. Obviously, their defense was dominant, and they could overcome it. But that doesn't mean that the LT isn't important. For the year, Seattle averaged 339 ypg, but in the final seven games including the playoffs, they only averaged 283. Neither SB team this past year spent a top 10 pick on a LT. Staley (drafted 7 years ago) went at 29, not 17. Kaepernick took a lot of sacks, despite all those 1st round O-line picks. Wilson took even more. His line was ranked lower than the Bills. Before the bye, he averaged 2.63 sacks a game. After the bye, it was 2.75. As for the bolded part, the best teams in the league can afford to shore up their O-line with a first round LT. Bad teams often don't make up any ground on the good teams when they do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) Neither SB team this past year spent a top 10 pick on a LT. Staley (drafted 7 years ago) went at 29, not 17. Kaepernick took a lot of sacks, despite all those 1st round O-line picks. Wilson took even more. His line was ranked lower than the Bills. Before the bye, he averaged 2.63 sacks a game. After the bye, it was 2.75. As for the bolded part, the best teams in the league can afford to shore up their O-line with a first round LT. Bad teams often don't make up any ground on the good teams when they do it. I'm not sure of your point. Why would any team draft an LT in the first round if they already had a first round LT? As for QBs and sacks, anyone who watched any of the Flutie-Johnson years knows that they're often more on the QB than the O-line. Running QBs get sacked more than quick-release pocket passers -- that's simply a fact, and the reason why is obvious. Both Wilson and Kaepernick rushed for over 500 yards. Brady and Manning rushed for barely any. As for Wilson, note what I said above about Okung missing the last half of the season. I stand corrected about Staley. I got the info from PFR. Incidentally, he was drafted 28th overall, not 29th. Edited February 27, 2014 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Neither SB team this past year spent a top 10 pick on a LT. Russell Okung, 6th overall pick 2010 draft. Next. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Russell Okung, 6th overall pick 2010 draft. Next. GO BILLS!!! yea but ryan clady was only pick 12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 When the discussion reaches this point, I hit the unfollow this topic button! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 If it's a very overvalued position, why did the two Super Bowl teams this year spend top ten picks on the position? The second best team in the league, the Niners, spent a 1st on Staley too - the 17th pick overall. The Pats also spent a first on their LT (again, the 17th pick overall). The crux of your argument rests on the claim that it's an overvalued position. If the four best teams in the league are a reliable gauge of football acumen, then you're completely wrong. As for Manning and the Broncos, Manning was terrible if he held the ball for 3 seconds plus this year. In the Pats regular season game, for instance, he was 0-8 with 2 INTs and not TDs on the plays he held it for 3 seconds plus (he was 19-28 with 2 TDs and no INTs on the other plays). The thing about Manning is that he gets rid of it so quickly that mediocre line play isn't a huge problem -- unless they're facing a team like the Seahawks that can exploit a weak LT while covering his receivers. As for the Seahawks, their offense (and especially Wilson) noticeably declined over the course of the second half of this past season -- i.e., in the games that Okung didn't play in plus the playoffs. Obviously, their defense was dominant, and they could overcome it. But that doesn't mean that the LT isn't important. For the year, Seattle averaged 339 ypg, but in the final seven games including the playoffs, they only averaged 283. Clady - Missed the whole season, team went to SB Jake Long - #1 overall pick, not re-signed by original team. Joe Thomas - considered one of the best, plays on awful team Peters - Has played on 2 winning teams, never won a playoff game Sure, you want talent at LT. you want talent everywhere. But it is an overvalued position. Spending big bucks on a LT is a good way to kill your cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Clady - Missed the whole season, team went to SB Jake Long - #1 overall pick, not re-signed by original team. Joe Thomas - considered one of the best, plays on awful team Peters - Has played on 2 winning teams, never won a playoff game Sure, you want talent at LT. you want talent everywhere. But it is an overvalued position. Spending big bucks on a LT is a good way to kill your cap. i feel like the last decade LT as a percentage of cap may be trending down a bit, with some of the dollars shifting across the line. ie without looking at any numbers and i could be completely wrong, but i feel like we have seen some correction to that overvalue, and its probably getting closer to a fair representation of their role in todays schemes where QBs are more aware and pass rush can come from anywhere? someone with my focus may find it worth peeking at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 i feel like the last decade LT as a percentage of cap may be trending down a bit, with some of the dollars shifting across the line. ie without looking at any numbers and i could be completely wrong, but i feel like we have seen some correction to that overvalue, and its probably getting closer to a fair representation of their role in todays schemes where QBs are more aware and pass rush can come from anywhere? someone with my focus may find it worth peeking at? Not spending money on a LT is a sure way to kill your QB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 As long as there is a premium on rushing the passer, there will be a premium on tackles that can protect him. Especially in spread formations where your edges are extremely vulnerable. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Not spending money on a LT is a sure way to kill your QB nowhere did i imply any bum off the street should be plugged in. i was getting at elite LTs possibly declining from 12% of cap to 10% for instance (completely made up numbers). maybe im not remembering right but i remember them being neck and neck with pass rushers and corners who seem to be getting a little bit more these days. just a thinking out loud moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 yea but ryan clady was only pick 12. I thought he was 9th from memory. My mistake. Regardless, he was in the top dozen - an elite pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I'm not sure of your point. Why would any team draft an LT in the first round if they already had a first round LT? As for QBs and sacks, anyone who watched any of the Flutie-Johnson years knows that they're often more on the QB than the O-line. Running QBs get sacked more than quick-release pocket passers -- that's simply a fact, and the reason why is obvious. Both Wilson and Kaepernick rushed for over 500 yards. Brady and Manning rushed for barely any. As for Wilson, note what I said above about Okung missing the last half of the season. I stand corrected about Staley. I got the info from PFR. Incidentally, he was drafted 28th overall, not 29th. I did note your note on Okung missing the second half of the season, that's why I pointed out that it had no impact on the sack rate. Tom Brady, a quick release pocket passer, took more sacks than Kaepernick--despite his team being one you cited as among the best in the league and that drafted a LT at 17. Russell Okung, 6th overall pick 2010 draft. Next. GO BILLS!!! My bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirty Year Fan Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 SOOO WHAT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts