Jump to content

Eagles sign Mike Wallace to a one-year deal


49erurtaza

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, sp6488 said:

I think a $25MM/year Wentz Eagles team would have been able to sign Wallace for $2.5MM just fine.

A $25M/year Wentz would have the Eagles $5M - $20M over the cap pending contract structure, so really they wouldn't have.

Plus, the quote Ketchup replied to was about more than just the Wallace deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jakuvious said:

A $25M/year Wentz would have the Eagles $5M - $20M over the cap pending contract structure, so really they wouldn't have.

if it was right now, yea we'd be screwed...but it'll line up nicely with Jason Peters retiring and Kendricks getting traded or moved. 
Both are Free Agents as you go into Wentz' Contract year in 2020, and both have easy outs in 2019 with only a combined 4.26 mil in dead money for 15 mil in cap room. Rodney Mcleod is another potential person to be moved after this season.

Next Year we likely won't resign Ajayi, too expensive with his knee concerns. Foles will leave, which will net us a decent comp pick if we dont go spending too much...but we'll have some room next year to add people if they want. Darby might get traded this year or not resigned and Hicks has been too hurt to ask for a big deal from us, so he'll be cheap. Only other thing is a pay bump for Brandon Graham maybe.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Eagles23 said:

I love it. Half the price of Torrey Smith, more production. Eagles can do anything at pick 32

Adding him don't change the eagles draft plans good pick tho .But definitely not a pick up that will change the eagles draft at all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jakuvious said:

A $25M/year Wentz would have the Eagles $5M - $20M over the cap pending contract structure, so really they wouldn't have.

Plus, the quote Ketchup replied to was about more than just the Wallace deal.

Ok.  It wasn't supposed to be a hyper-literal commentary about the state of the Eagles cap.  More an acknowledgement that this deal is very reasonable and wouldn't be the type of thing that the team would need to shy away from in a less enviable cap constraint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ketchup said:

Did I say they wouldn’t be able to? Context matters. 

Chill, you and Jak are apparently getting worked up about an innocuous comment that merely suggested this was a good deal that wouldn't stress the team's cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, sp6488 said:

Chill, you and Jak are apparently getting worked up about an innocuous comment that merely suggested this was a good deal that wouldn't stress the team's cap.

Getting worked up? Nah, I’m good. Nobody is arguing that it wasn’t a good deal that won’t stress the cap. I replied to someone that said the Eagles are in good shape and making some really good moves, which they are. My point was to point out that being in good shape with the cap and making the moves they are is helped by the fact their franchise QB is still on his rookie deal. Nowhere did I imply that Wallace wouldn’t have been brought in if Wentz wasn’t on his rookie deal so not sure why you quoted me to make that innocuous comment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howie is a Genius when it comes to manipulating the Cap. When Wentz comes around to his rediculous contract many of the current contracts of Peters, Sproles, Jenkins, Graham ,ect. will come to a end.

However much like Seattle, the Eagles too will be hamstringed once they  have to pay 100+M to a QB. It's why building pieces around a Rookie FQB in the beginning and being able to make a run is so important.

Hopefully the FO continues to do just that the next few seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Don't mean to do some minor thread necromancy, but felt this was a bit interesting.

I mean, I suppose this is a LTBE item, but seems odd that you have to set the threshold at 250 pounds for a receiver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Woz said:

Don't mean to do some minor thread necromancy, but felt this was a bit interesting.

I mean, I suppose this is a LTBE item, but seems odd that you have to set the threshold at 250 pounds for a receiver.

As I mentioned in our Forum it's just another way to "Guarantee" money to a player without it impacting the overall cap #. Easily attainable type incentives.

Happens all the times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nabbs4u said:

As I mentioned in our Forum it's just another way to "Guarantee" money to a player without it impacting the overall cap #. Easily attainable type incentives.

But it does affect your cap. Incentives either affect the current year's cap or the next year's cap based on whether they are deemed "likely" or "unlikely" to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, cddolphin said:

But it does affect your cap. Incentives either affect the current year's cap or the next year's cap based on whether they are deemed "likely" or "unlikely" to happen.

You just don't understand Howie's brilliance.

 

For real though, it hits the cap. The only purpose that type of incentive would really serve is on a multi-year contract, where you could use this sort of incentive to give a player money early in the contract as a bonus instead of salary (so good for the player because it is an early lump payment, not checks over the course of the season), but it isn't a signing bonus so it isn't stretched out over the course of the contract in terms of when it hits the cap. A lot of teams will do this with roster bonuses. Give them a roster bonus if they're on the roster like a week or two after signing the contract. Gets the player money up front, and hits the cap up front instead of over time. But with a one year deal the whole thing is really just pointless. Making it a signing bonus would've achieved the same thing, unless they were actually concerned Wallace wouldn't be in shape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...