Biggest mistake this offseason?

[Battlelyon]

Discuss...

 

[beardown07]

Iggles all the way. One of the worst moves in offseason history.




BTW, I bet I can guess @noonthirtyjoe's choice since he didn't explain his "other".




I would bet his left foot, that his choice is the Bears letting a 30 yr old RB go. (Matt Forte.)



Amirite, noon?

 

[beardown07]

The Skins overpaying for a past-his-prime player, is like a bodily function for them, so it's hardly even noticeable.

 

[beardown07]

Apparently, Eagles fans are ecstatic about the deal??

 

[The Oldtimer]

I voted for the Skins signing Norman for 51 mill. IMO, Norman is overrated.

 

[SonnyCID]

Norman didn't get 51 of truly guaranteed money. He got 36.5.

 

[beardown07]

At least you know what you are getting with Norman.



And ya didn't hafta sacrifice the next two drafts for him.

 

[Malibu]

All the above

 

[SonnyCID]

The Panthers could trade Norman because he didn't sign his tender.

 

[Iggloo]

The answer is, we will see. If the Rams/Eagles get a franchise QB, I doubt anyone will be crying over the compensation. Obviously odds are that they won't. Similarly, if Norman plays like he did last season, for three more seasons, the Skins will be happy. If he regresses like most 30+ year olds in a year, then they won't.

 

[The Oldtimer]

The Panthers could trade Norman because he didn't sign his tender.

Why didn't the Panthers trade Norman? They might have gotten a 3rd rounder for him.

 

[SonnyCID]

Why didn't the Panthers trade Norman? They might have gotten a 3rd rounder for him.

They tagged him. But in order for him to be "under contract", Which is what it would take to trade him, he would have needed to sign the tender. Without it, there are no contractual rights to trade away. Both sides were basically in limbo.

 

[The Oldtimer]

They tagged him. But in order for him to be "under contract", Which is what it would take to trade him, he would have needed to sign the tender. Without it, there are no contractual rights to trade away. Both sides were basically in limbo.

Thanks for the info.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Eagles in a landslide. The Rams is a close 2nd, but at least there's some logic there in the new city and the fact they are securing EXACTLY what they want with the 1st and have absolutely NOTHING at QB. Still, Rams have many holes and just like the Skins are mortgaging the future if the 1st overall doesn't pan out. Even if he does, you're still playing against Seattle/Arizona who have excellent ownership/GMs and they'll certainly exploit holes unless your QB becomes the next Peyton Manning... which get real, Goff/Wentz? LOL.

That said, The Eagles just blows my mind. Sam Bradford will break something again with a strong gust of wind but you just paid Chase Daniel a $21M 3 year contract! That's more than just 'backup' money. That's "you're the guy when this other guy croaks" kind of money. There is zero option of getting rid of either (nobody is trading for any of those ridiculous contracts mind you) since the dead cap hits for this year (and next year for Chase) are far from practical.

The Eagles will be shelling out $23.5M for QB positions (assuming they take Wentz/Goff) on.... here it comes... Bradford, Daniels, Rookie QB (Mark Sanchez minor hit for trade). Like WTF!?

The Eagles almost restored my faith. They unloaded the mess that Kelly got them into (with Murray, Maxwell, and Alonso getting shipped out), got rid of Captain butt fumble, re-signed Randle for cheap, Givens cheap, and Bradham, not bad... and then went full derp and made this trade.

Don't even get me started if they draft Tunsil with that whole fiasco of a trade. Jesus lmao if they do.


As to the other selections (justified Rams/Eagles above):

I actually gave a B grade to the Norman signing. See the Josh Norman thread with my explanation (towards the tail end of the posts).

I think the Panthers letting Norman walk was a mistake, but that's a team with a good front office, so it's passable.

Those last 2 are nowhere close to the above 2 I mention.

 

[Iggloo]

Bradford is actually quite tradeable for reasons we have repeatedly discussed.

The cap hit to another team next season would be $7 million. Not nothing, but not enormous for a starting QB.

The bigger issue for another team would be the following year's cap hit: $17 million. But, they could cut him, or restructure that if they signed him to a new deal.

Will someone do this? No idea. But the Jets and Broncos look pretty thirsty at QB right now.

As for the Eagles, they would save $1.5 million by getting rid of him as opposed to keeping him, even though his signing bonus would count against the current year's cap.

he $11 million signing bonus has already been paid out to Bradford in it's entirety, meaning owner Jeffrey Lurie has already handed the quarterback a hefty check that he won't be getting back.

If the Eagles were to trade Bradford the night of the draft (or prior to 6/1/16) his entire $11 million signing bonus turns into dead cap for the Eagles this year. That would meaning $1.5 million in savings against the cap, since his cap hit is $12.5 million this season.

If the team were to trade him after 6/1/16, say during training camp to a team that suddenly needs an average quarterback, the dead cap splits as $5.5 million in 2016 and $5.5 million in 2017.

That would mean a $7 million savings against the cap for the Eagles this season, but he would be on the books for $5.5 million next season -- something that wouldn't be the case if they traded him the night of the draft.

As for Bradford's new team, if he were to be traded, the quarterback would have a $7 million cap hit in 2016 and a $17 million hit in 2017.

Will Eagles trade Sam Bradford? Here are the cap ramifications if they do

 

[The Derski]

Probably should wait you know... longer than a week before we judge.

 

[Sharkinva]

Norman didn't get 51 of truly guaranteed money. He got 36.5.

Hey... none of that facts shit when it gets in the way if a good old fashioned Skins bashing session.

 

[Sharkinva]

They tagged him. But in order for him to be "under contract", Which is what it would take to trade him, he would have needed to sign the tender. Without it, there are no contractual rights to trade away. Both sides were basically in limbo.

Not quite. As a tagged player, he was free to negotiate with other teams and even if he did not sign his tender, had another team signed him the Panthers would have gotten two first round picks in return for not matching the offer he signed with another team. Now had they maintained the tag, the Panthers could have agreed to take less in draft pick compensation should Norman have signed with another squad and they not match the deal.

This is basically what the redskins did with Champ Bailey and his going to Denver. They tagged him, Denver wanted him but was not willing to give up 2 first rounders. Bailey refused to sign the tender, So Washington agreed to take Portis and swap 2nd rounders with Denver. Denver agreed provided the Skins would not try and match the offer they presented to Bailey.

 

[Breed]

I'm of two minds over the Norman deal at present. Which is a significant step up from how I normally feel after the Skins make a move in FA.......or in the draft........or make a trade.

The correct answer though is other as in WTF does Jeff Fisher still a HC job in the NFL and why would any team continue to pay Sam "what the fuck you got to be mad about!" Bradford.

 

[Clayton]

You can justify the Rams trade. They are getting the top QB and trading away the next 2 seasons which in the grand scheme of things isnt a huge deal if they get a QB other than wasting part of Aaron Donald and Todd Gurley's career. The Rams trade is just really dumb because they didn't need to trade away any draft assets to get a franchise QB in previous years but now all of a sudden they blow tons of draft capital.

The Eagles are punting on a very winnable division and gutting their team to get the 2nd best QB prospect in a year where the QB prospects are below average. I honestly have no words.