The Master Vent Thread-Negativity Within-Enter at Your Own Risk

[Smed55]

Had to think about what you were disagreeing on, because I'm certain you don't believe it will all turn out roses for Sam in Philly...

So, it's not that you disagree with my statement as much as you think I'm lying...

That's okay, disagree if you must, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and that's my whole point here.
I wouldn't call it sucking up as much as sticking up. Sometimes the mob mentality is strong here and I'd stand up for anyone of yous, you too zeke!

Just as a matter of reference, here is Coug's actual quote @LongtimeRamsFan42 where he backed off...

The bottom line, there are plenty of QB's who have had success, like a ...

• Josh Freeman
• Matt Moore
• Kevin Kobb
• Ryan Tannehill
• Jake Locker
• Brandon Weedon
• Mark Sanchez
• Johnny Manziel
• Matt Cassel
• Robert Griffin
• Tim Tebow
• Nick Foles
• Case Kneenum
• Even the adored Austin Davis

None of those dudes, that I'm aware of, will be making $18M next season, now if SB was as bad as what I've heard from somehere, why the hell is he not on this list?

Why?

I read RR's post, still doesn't answer why!

So why SB?

If I listen to some of you, it just doesn't add up.

So what gives?

Bradford should be on this list, but even I would have to admit I would take him over a few of these guys? Most of these guys are career backups, the few that have been starters started years ago and obviously aren't going to be making big money now?
I believe that Tannehill is making close to $20 mil a year and he has put up better stats than Bradford ever has.
It comes down to some idiots that still believe in SAMs potential, why I'll never understand, the guy has had more chances than all these guys combined yet he has proven nothing. Obviously there continues to be teams that are desperate, and signing Bradford to that kind of money, is a sign of desperation!
As far as coaches wanting him, Fisher has proven to be not very good at evaluating talent, i still think (along with many Eagle fans) that Kelly really didn't want him, he thought he could still get Marriota with the right trade pieces, it back fired on him! Is he really Pedersens first choice, i doubt it, the draft doesn't offer much this year, and most FA QB's will probably re-sign with the team they were already on, or they would cost Philly even more money, because EVERY FA QB this year, had a better year than Bradford did! I think Philly made a good move to retain him, but overpaid for him!

 

[Smed55]

But Flacco certainly has a strong overall pedigree and a superb postseason pedigree and has been durable and, at times, outstanding. Say what you want about Baltimore's deal with Flacco, but what Sam Bradford and Tom Condon pulled off on the Eagles is even more stupendous. When you compare what the player has accomplished with what he has earned and what he will continue to earn, no quarterback contract is more baffling to me (OK, the Foles extension with the Rams last year maybe still is). Few speak more directly to the lack of perceived available options at the quarterback position, and the lengths teams will go.

He has already pocketed over $78M in the NFL, and of all of the quarterbacks who have entered the NFL in 2010 or later, only Matthew Stafford has earned more. For the 2016 season, only Philip Rivers, Drew Brees, Cam Newton, Cousins and Flacco are quarterbacks set to earn more than the $18M cash Bradford will make (excluding Peyton Manning, as the Broncos will cut him before his $19M deal becomes guaranteed next week).

Bradford, who many executives and agents believed had little-to-no market outside of Philadelphia, received $22 million guaranteed for one year of work, and the chance to earn $36 million over the next two years (including about $4 million in incentives). This is the same Bradford whom the Rams, who drafted him first-overall and remain one of the most quarterback-needy teams in the NFL, were eager to finally part with a year ago rather than have to pay him another $14 million to try to come back off another surgery and believed, ahem, Foles to be a more viable option.

This is the same Bradford who again got hurt in 2015, who has played in only 21 of his team's past 48 regular-season games, who has never been to the playoffs, and who, even last season with his second-half surge, still ranked 26th in the NFL in passer rating.

Bradford has already pocketed over $78 million in the NFL, and of all of the quarterbacks who have entered the NFL in 2010 or later, only Matthew Stafford has earned more. For the 2016 season, only Philip Rivers, Drew Brees, Cam Newton, Cousins and Flacco are quarterbacks set to earn more than the $18 million Bradford will make -- excluding Peyton Manning, as the Broncos will cut him before his $19 million deal becomes guaranteed next week.

Even if you think maybe, just maybe, Bradford's former coach in Philadelphia (Chip Kelly) wanted to reunite with him in San Francisco, and you know few people do bad contracts like Kelly (who was willing to overpay Bradford a year ago to extend him with the Eagles), there is the matter of Colin Kaepernick still being out on Kelly's roster and Kelly doesn't have control of the purse strings as he did in Philly. The Eagles always had other options and if Bradford had leverage, it was seemingly only with the Eagles.

If they wanted to pay Bradford $18 million, they could have put the transition tag on him at $17.7 million, and then had the right to match any contract. Let the market speak. If you think this guy is really your quarterback for the foreseeable future (and the Eagles don't, given the structure of this deal, as I will get to in a moment), then see what kind of offer sheet someone else will sign him to, let them do the negotiating for you, and then opt to match or let him go, for no compensation.

Frankly, there is no way I am signing him to anything before March 9, and I would let him see exactly what the market had to bear, especially with the Eagles' dreadful season putting them in position to draft a quarterback 13th overall -- and they very well might still do so even after inking Bradford to this two-year pact. Ain't no way in hell I am giving Bradford $11 million to sign, guaranteeing his $7 million base salary in 2016 as well and then also guaranteeing him $4 million of his $13 million base salary in 2017.


Sam Bradford's two-year deal is worth $36 million. (USATSI)

What the Eagles did, in essence, is transition him -- nearly $18 million for 2016 -- and then buy another year of his potential service if they so desire via a $4 million roster bonus next March, as they can walk from the player if they don't pick it up. But they did so at such a premium -- $22 million guaranteed including that $4 million for 2017 -- that generally nets a team rights to the player over many more years.

“When you pay $22 million for a player, you always get more than two years,” as one team negotiator put it. “Who would they even have been bidding against, at these numbers, realistically?"

That is part of what has other NFL executives and salary cap experts shaking their heads.

Many said they would not do it for even an elite player. None said he would do it for Bradford. And if even the Eagles truly believed in Bradford, and were willing to pay him $18 million over a number of years, they would have done so. It would not be structured as a Band-Aid deal, if it was not in fact a Band-Aid deal.

They're hedging their bets for a reason, but doing so at a price most teams would pay -- even for a standout player -- in exchange for long-term control of the asset. To give Bradford a 33 percent raise over his $13.5 million salary in 2015 (the final year of his bonus-baby rookie contract from the old CBA) in a year in which the team fell well below expectations and in which he ranked 26th in rating, 25th in yards per attempt and threw 19 touchdowns to 14 interceptions and tied for the fourth-most turnovers in the NFL is somewhat staggering to me.

And many would argue this was Bradford's best NFL season. It is not an anomaly. Not like it was some down year. Since Bradford entered the league in 2010 as the first overall pick, here are his ranks among all NFL quarterbacks:

25th in completion percentage (60.1, about the same as Foles)
20th in yards (14,790)
36th in yards per attempt (6.45, right there with Matt Cassel and Mark Sanchez and Brandon Weeden)
21st in touchdowns (78)
35th in touchdown percentage (3.4, just above Christian Ponder)
18th in interceptions (52)
11th in interception percentage (2.3, so he is almost top 10 in something)
30th in quarterback rating (81.0, just behind Brian Hoyer and just ahead of Josh Freeman)
As Don King said: only in America. In this case, only in Philadelphia.

But that's how things go in the NFL these days for quarterbacks, it seems, with the trend nowhere close to its end. No one in this game is overpaid, given the risks involved for the players and the unquantifiable rewards these owners bask in, and I would never begrudge anyone maximizing his value.

 

[Smed55]

Sorry, this is the first half of the above story

If you gathered Andrew Luck, Aaron Rodgers, Ryan Fitzpatrick and Brock Osweiler in the same room right now, whom would have the biggest smile?

Given the eruption of the quarterback market over the past 24 hours, those quarterbacks must be beaming from ear to ear. All have a reason to salivate over the number of zeros soon to be attached (or, in the case of Rodgers, eventually reattached via extension) to their contracts, with the recent mega-deals doled out to Kirk Cousins, Sam Bradford and Joe Flacco since the start of this week re-setting the quarterback market on its, well, ear.

So, with Luck in line for his first big-boy NFL contract and Fitzpatrick and Osweiler pending free agents engaged deep in talks with the Jets and Broncos respectively, and Rodgers looking at the deals handed to Cam Newton and Russell Wilson and in line for another bite at the apple himself, well, what a time to be an NFL quarterback. Even a marginal one!

The salary cap is finally increasing in leaps and bounds, the television (and relocation) money is flowing into owners and teams are desperate to keep the quarterbacks they have, whether they be one-year wonders (Cousins), mostly busts to this point in their career (Bradford), unproven commodities (Osweiler) or a guy who was available for essentially a sixth-round pick just a year ago (Fitzpatrick). Or in the case of the Ravens, desperate to lower the cap figure of the franchise quarterback they already have, even if he is currently rehabbing a torn ACL and MCL (Flacco).

So, in the span of one day, Cousins, Bradford and Flacco basically netted a combined $86 million guaranteed for 2016 alone -- including Flacco's $40 million signing bonus, which includes deferred payments over time but is fully guaranteed as of Wednesday. That is staggering, and is lighting up the halls of the NFLPA and agent's offices all over the country. And it is Exhibit 100 as to why it was utterly ridiculous for Colts owner Jim Irsay to refuse to engage Luck in contract talks a year ago before all hell broke loose over and over again.


Cousins has a one-year deal worth $19.95 million in place right now. (USATSI)

One could make the case, and rightfully so, that the Redskins had no choice but to franchise Cousins, even at $20 million for one season. Sources have indicated Cousins very well may go ahead and sign that franchise tender Wednesday, making that figure fully guaranteed and negate any more talks about a long-term deal for another year. He is coming off one of the best seasons in franchise history, he is beloved by his coaches and teammates, the Redskins had no viable Plan B and they are about to get $17 million off their books for 2016 by cutting Robert Griffin III.

Oh yeah, and RG3 and Colin Kaepernick much be jumping for joy if/when they get cut, too, given the way the money is flowing at their position.

As I reported back in December, the Redskins had decided internally they weren't going to let Cousins walk and would be prepared to franchise him to keep him, and that's where this thing was always headed.

Similarly, with Flacco set to count nearly $30 million against their cap, the Ravens always knew they were going to have to approach him about a new deal in February 2016. When Flacco signed his "six-year" pact with Baltimore back in 2013, it was always truly a three-year, $62 million deal (with record guarantees) that would force both sides back to the table in 2016. And Flacco, with huge base salaries and cap figures remaining on that deal, had no reason to agree to anything that didn't fully incentivize him to do so. And, for the second time in 36 months or so, his agent, Joe Linta, is exacting a shocking payday from the Ravens, record marks in several key salary metrics, and absolutely killed it for his client.

Unlike the last time around, Flacco was not coming off a Super Bowl MVP selection and one of the greatest postseasons in NFL history. He was coming off a lowly five-win total for a team some (surprisingly) picked as preseason Super Bowl favorites and a year in which his remarkable games played streak was snapped by a season-ending knee injury. Yet still Flacco prospered in ways I'm not sure many besides Linta thought he might.

Consider: Flacco received a record $40 million signing bonus and gets $44 million guaranteed in year one of this new deal alone. The total new money on the contract (meaning the new money he is signed for beyond what he was already owed) is a record $66.4 million, or $22.1 million per new year, again, you guessed it, a record. For the full six years of his deal, Flacco averages over $20 million per year. Yes, the Ravens get a little more wiggle room (his cap number goes from $28.6 million down to $22.6 million in 2016, and Baltimore saves $13.3 million in cap room over the next two years) and Flacco's base salaries decrease to $4 million this year, $6 million in 2017 and $12 million in 2018.


Joe Flacco signed a three-year extension on Wednesday. (USATSI)

But between the $62 million Flacco earned from 2013-15, plus his 2016 signing bonus and base salary, that total amasses to $106 million in a four-year span. Wowsers. Yes, that bonus includes deferred payments, but it is still fully guaranteed at the time of signing. He secured over $100 million in four years. Flacco should erect a statue to Linta outside his home. The NFLPA should consider a similar plan near their Washington, D.C., offices.

 

[Smed55]

The Eagles always had other options and if Bradford had leverage, it was seemingly only with the Eagles.

Bradford, who many executives and agents believed had little-to-no market outside of Philadelphia

If you think this guy is really your quarterback for the foreseeable future (and the Eagles don't,

Many said they would not do it for even an elite player. None said he would do it for Bradford

And many would argue this was Bradford's best NFL season, in which he ranked 26th in rating, 25th in yards per attempt and threw 19 touchdowns to 14 interceptions and tied for the fourth-most turnovers in the NFL is somewhat staggering to me.


Those are just excerpts of this story, but they tell the Sam Bradford story, and it's an ugly one! For everyone except Sammy raking in the undeserved money!

The proof is in the pudding, or in this case the numbers Coug, keep living in your fantasy world where Sammy is a HOF, let alone a above average QB. As Popeye would say "he is what he is" a average QB, and that's at best!

 

[Battlelyon]

 

[Smed55]

Coug, remember when you were telling all of us how great Sammie played down the stretch, and I kept telling you it was a bunch of garbage time stats, well here's another story from a Eagles website!

PHILADELPHIA EAGLES LINKS
Eagles News: Sam Bradford's seven game stretch wasn't as good as you think
By Brandon Lee Gowton  @BrandonGowton on Mar 1, 2016, 6:08a 141


Eric Hartline-USA TODAY Sports
Philadelphia Eagles news and links for 3/1/16.

 TWEET SHARE PIN
Let's get to the Philadelphia Eagles links ...

Bradford's #LastSevenGames pic.twitter.com/s0hsE0Gzd1

— Jimmy Kempski (@JimmyKempski) February 29, 2016
Busting five big myths about the Eagles 2015 season - BGN
Bradford's 68.2 completion percentage was 9th best, but he attempted the 11th most passes, for the 13th most yards, giving him a below average 19th in yards per attempt. His 10 TDs in seven games limited his passer rating to 97.0, which on the surface looks fine but in reality was worse than 20 other QB's best seven game stretch. Compared to his peers over a similar sample, Bradford was mediocre at best.

10 reasons Eagles shouldn't re-sign Sam Bradford - NJ.com
Were Bradford's last seven games an improvement? Yes. Were they elite? No. While many like to point to Bradford's 65% completion percentage over the last seven games, he had only 60 completions all season that went 10 beyond the line of scrimmage -- meaning only 17.3% of his completions were beyond 10 yards. That was third worst in the NFL.

 

[27mtrcougar]

But Flacco certainly has a strong overall pedigree and a superb postseason pedigree and has been durable and, at times, outstanding. Say what you want about Baltimore's deal with Flacco, but what Sam Bradford and Tom Condon pulled off on the Eagles is even more stupendous. When you compare what the player has accomplished with what he has earned and what he will continue to earn, no quarterback contract is more baffling to me (OK, the Foles extension with the Rams last year maybe still is). Few speak more directly to the lack of perceived available options at the quarterback position, and the lengths teams will go.

He has already pocketed over $78M in the NFL, and of all of the quarterbacks who have entered the NFL in 2010 or later, only Matthew Stafford has earned more. For the 2016 season, only Philip Rivers, Drew Brees, Cam Newton, Cousins and Flacco are quarterbacks set to earn more than the $18M cash Bradford will make (excluding Peyton Manning, as the Broncos will cut him before his $19M deal becomes guaranteed next week).

Bradford, who many executives and agents believed had little-to-no market outside of Philadelphia, received $22 million guaranteed for one year of work, and the chance to earn $36 million over the next two years (including about $4 million in incentives). This is the same Bradford whom the Rams, who drafted him first-overall and remain one of the most quarterback-needy teams in the NFL, were eager to finally part with a year ago rather than have to pay him another $14 million to try to come back off another surgery and believed, ahem, Foles to be a more viable option.

This is the same Bradford who again got hurt in 2015, who has played in only 21 of his team's past 48 regular-season games, who has never been to the playoffs, and who, even last season with his second-half surge, still ranked 26th in the NFL in passer rating.

Bradford has already pocketed over $78 million in the NFL, and of all of the quarterbacks who have entered the NFL in 2010 or later, only Matthew Stafford has earned more. For the 2016 season, only Philip Rivers, Drew Brees, Cam Newton, Cousins and Flacco are quarterbacks set to earn more than the $18 million Bradford will make -- excluding Peyton Manning, as the Broncos will cut him before his $19 million deal becomes guaranteed next week.

Even if you think maybe, just maybe, Bradford's former coach in Philadelphia (Chip Kelly) wanted to reunite with him in San Francisco, and you know few people do bad contracts like Kelly (who was willing to overpay Bradford a year ago to extend him with the Eagles), there is the matter of Colin Kaepernick still being out on Kelly's roster and Kelly doesn't have control of the purse strings as he did in Philly. The Eagles always had other options and if Bradford had leverage, it was seemingly only with the Eagles.

If they wanted to pay Bradford $18 million, they could have put the transition tag on him at $17.7 million, and then had the right to match any contract. Let the market speak. If you think this guy is really your quarterback for the foreseeable future (and the Eagles don't, given the structure of this deal, as I will get to in a moment), then see what kind of offer sheet someone else will sign him to, let them do the negotiating for you, and then opt to match or let him go, for no compensation.

Frankly, there is no way I am signing him to anything before March 9, and I would let him see exactly what the market had to bear, especially with the Eagles' dreadful season putting them in position to draft a quarterback 13th overall -- and they very well might still do so even after inking Bradford to this two-year pact. Ain't no way in hell I am giving Bradford $11 million to sign, guaranteeing his $7 million base salary in 2016 as well and then also guaranteeing him $4 million of his $13 million base salary in 2017.


Sam Bradford's two-year deal is worth $36 million. (USATSI)

What the Eagles did, in essence, is transition him -- nearly $18 million for 2016 -- and then buy another year of his potential service if they so desire via a $4 million roster bonus next March, as they can walk from the player if they don't pick it up. But they did so at such a premium -- $22 million guaranteed including that $4 million for 2017 -- that generally nets a team rights to the player over many more years.

“When you pay $22 million for a player, you always get more than two years,” as one team negotiator put it. “Who would they even have been bidding against, at these numbers, realistically?"

That is part of what has other NFL executives and salary cap experts shaking their heads.

Many said they would not do it for even an elite player. None said he would do it for Bradford. And if even the Eagles truly believed in Bradford, and were willing to pay him $18 million over a number of years, they would have done so. It would not be structured as a Band-Aid deal, if it was not in fact a Band-Aid deal.

They're hedging their bets for a reason, but doing so at a price most teams would pay -- even for a standout player -- in exchange for long-term control of the asset. To give Bradford a 33 percent raise over his $13.5 million salary in 2015 (the final year of his bonus-baby rookie contract from the old CBA) in a year in which the team fell well below expectations and in which he ranked 26th in rating, 25th in yards per attempt and threw 19 touchdowns to 14 interceptions and tied for the fourth-most turnovers in the NFL is somewhat staggering to me.

And many would argue this was Bradford's best NFL season. It is not an anomaly. Not like it was some down year. Since Bradford entered the league in 2010 as the first overall pick, here are his ranks among all NFL quarterbacks:

25th in completion percentage (60.1, about the same as Foles)
20th in yards (14,790)
36th in yards per attempt (6.45, right there with Matt Cassel and Mark Sanchez and Brandon Weeden)
21st in touchdowns (78)
35th in touchdown percentage (3.4, just above Christian Ponder)
18th in interceptions (52)
11th in interception percentage (2.3, so he is almost top 10 in something)
30th in quarterback rating (81.0, just behind Brian Hoyer and just ahead of Josh Freeman)
As Don King said: only in America. In this case, only in Philadelphia.

But that's how things go in the NFL these days for quarterbacks, it seems, with the trend nowhere close to its end. No one in this game is overpaid, given the risks involved for the players and the unquantifiable rewards these owners bask in, and I would never begrudge anyone maximizing his value.

Yes Flacco has won a Super Bowl but please tell me when Bradford has had one of the best defenses in NFL history backing him up like Joe did?? Sam has had nothing close to that. Flacco had some very nice weapons that year on offense too. No One brings up that Sam played on some of the WORST teams in history and still did pretty good for what he was delt. Look how Flacco did last year without a great D and offense... Not so good. LOOK my argument for Sam when he was with the Rams and now with the Eagles when everyone bitches about him has always been... who are you going to get that's better??? I know he's not Brady or Rodgers... But Who is coming into camp and beating him out? No one has been able to do this since 2010. Now as a Rams fan you should be able to see the difference in talent that Sam has then when Foles Gold, Davis or case Keenum is your everyday starter. Sam has never been a backup always a starter. Yeah Smed big deal this reporter bashes Sam all the time so do others but there are just as many who say what I do also. I would love to ask this fool who the Eagles could've brought in to be better?

 

[Vitamike]

For the 2016 season, only Philip Rivers, Drew Brees, Cam Newton, Cousins and Flacco are quarterbacks set to earn more than the $18M cash Bradford will make (excluding Peyton Manning, as the Broncos will cut him before his $19M deal becomes guaranteed next week).

Wow! That makes him as near as a top 5 paid QB as you can get!

Another near spot on prediction for Coug or should I say Nostradamus.



Alls I'm really saying, homeboy damned near hit some of those guesses out of the park considering the amount of grief y'all gave him.

Sure he has spouted off some BS, but don't we all?

 

[Vitamike]

But Flacco certainly has a strong overall pedigree and a superb postseason pedigree and has been durable and, at times, outstanding. Say what you want about Baltimore's deal with Flacco, but what Sam Bradford and Tom Condon pulled off on the Eagles is even more stupendous. When you compare what the player has accomplished with what he has earned and what he will continue to earn, no quarterback contract is more baffling to me (OK, the Foles extension with the Rams last year maybe still is). Few speak more directly to the lack of perceived available options at the quarterback position, and the lengths teams will go.

He has already pocketed over $78M in the NFL, and of all of the quarterbacks who have entered the NFL in 2010 or later, only Matthew Stafford has earned more. For the 2016 season, only Philip Rivers, Drew Brees, Cam Newton, Cousins and Flacco are quarterbacks set to earn more than the $18M cash Bradford will make (excluding Peyton Manning, as the Broncos will cut him before his $19M deal becomes guaranteed next week).

Bradford, who many executives and agents believed had little-to-no market outside of Philadelphia, received $22 million guaranteed for one year of work, and the chance to earn $36 million over the next two years (including about $4 million in incentives). This is the same Bradford whom the Rams, who drafted him first-overall and remain one of the most quarterback-needy teams in the NFL, were eager to finally part with a year ago rather than have to pay him another $14 million to try to come back off another surgery and believed, ahem, Foles to be a more viable option.

This is the same Bradford who again got hurt in 2015, who has played in only 21 of his team's past 48 regular-season games, who has never been to the playoffs, and who, even last season with his second-half surge, still ranked 26th in the NFL in passer rating.

Bradford has already pocketed over $78 million in the NFL, and of all of the quarterbacks who have entered the NFL in 2010 or later, only Matthew Stafford has earned more. For the 2016 season, only Philip Rivers, Drew Brees, Cam Newton, Cousins and Flacco are quarterbacks set to earn more than the $18 million Bradford will make -- excluding Peyton Manning, as the Broncos will cut him before his $19 million deal becomes guaranteed next week.

Even if you think maybe, just maybe, Bradford's former coach in Philadelphia (Chip Kelly) wanted to reunite with him in San Francisco, and you know few people do bad contracts like Kelly (who was willing to overpay Bradford a year ago to extend him with the Eagles), there is the matter of Colin Kaepernick still being out on Kelly's roster and Kelly doesn't have control of the purse strings as he did in Philly. The Eagles always had other options and if Bradford had leverage, it was seemingly only with the Eagles.

If they wanted to pay Bradford $18 million, they could have put the transition tag on him at $17.7 million, and then had the right to match any contract. Let the market speak. If you think this guy is really your quarterback for the foreseeable future (and the Eagles don't, given the structure of this deal, as I will get to in a moment), then see what kind of offer sheet someone else will sign him to, let them do the negotiating for you, and then opt to match or let him go, for no compensation.

Frankly, there is no way I am signing him to anything before March 9, and I would let him see exactly what the market had to bear, especially with the Eagles' dreadful season putting them in position to draft a quarterback 13th overall -- and they very well might still do so even after inking Bradford to this two-year pact. Ain't no way in hell I am giving Bradford $11 million to sign, guaranteeing his $7 million base salary in 2016 as well and then also guaranteeing him $4 million of his $13 million base salary in 2017.


Sam Bradford's two-year deal is worth $36 million. (USATSI)

What the Eagles did, in essence, is transition him -- nearly $18 million for 2016 -- and then buy another year of his potential service if they so desire via a $4 million roster bonus next March, as they can walk from the player if they don't pick it up. But they did so at such a premium -- $22 million guaranteed including that $4 million for 2017 -- that generally nets a team rights to the player over many more years.
Yadda, yadda, yadda!

Sorry, this is the first half of the above story

If you gathered Andrew Luck, Aaron Rodgers, Ryan Fitzpatrick and Brock Osweiler in the same room right now, whom would have the biggest smile?

Given the eruption of the quarterback market over the past 24 hours, those quarterbacks must be beaming from ear to ear. All have a reason to salivate over the number of zeros soon to be attached (or, in the case of Rodgers, eventually reattached via extension) to their contracts, with the recent mega-deals doled out to Kirk Cousins, Sam Bradford and Joe Flacco since the start of this week re-setting the quarterback market on its, well, ear.

So, with Luck in line for his first big-boy NFL contract and Fitzpatrick and Osweiler pending free agents engaged deep in talks with the Jets and Broncos respectively, and Rodgers looking at the deals handed to Cam Newton and Russell Wilson and in line for another bite at the apple himself, well, what a time to be an NFL quarterback. Even a marginal one!

The salary cap is finally increasing in leaps and bounds, the television (and relocation) money is flowing into owners and teams are desperate to keep the quarterbacks they have, whether they be one-year wonders (Cousins), mostly busts to this point in their career (Bradford), unproven commodities (Osweiler) or a guy who was available for essentially a sixth-round pick just a year ago (Fitzpatrick). Or in the case of the Ravens, desperate to lower the cap figure of the franchise quarterback they already have, even if he is currently rehabbing a torn ACL and MCL (Flacco).

So, in the span of one day, Cousins, Bradford and Flacco basically netted a combined $86 million guaranteed for 2016 alone -- including Flacco's $40 million signing bonus, which includes deferred payments over time but is fully guaranteed as of Wednesday. That is staggering, and is lighting up the halls of the NFLPA and agent's offices all over the country. And it is Exhibit 100 as to why it was utterly ridiculous for Colts owner Jim Irsay to refuse to engage Luck in contract talks a year ago before all hell broke loose over and over again.


Cousins has a one-year deal worth $19.95 million in place right now. (USATSI)

Yadda, yadda, yadda!

Thanks Smed!

I really appreciate you going the extra yard to help answer my question.

Still not sure why guys like Josh Freeman or even a Tim Tebow can't get an NFL third string gig yet a SB gets near top 5 QB pay in 2016.

 

[chy1127]

Bradford also jumped into the last year that allowed crazy contracts for rookies. If the Eagles were convinced he was a franchise QB they would have signed him long term. Instead they want to give him a 2nd try-out year.

 

[27mtrcougar]

Bradford also jumped into the last year that allowed crazy contracts for rookies. If the Eagles were convinced he was a franchise QB they would have signed him long term. Instead they want to give him a 2nd try-out year.

Well if it's a "try out year" the 22m guaranteed they're giving him pretty much makes him the highest-paid quarterback in 2016 I believe. Flacco will make like 100k more.

 

[chy1127]

Well if it's a "try out year" the 22m guaranteed they're giving him pretty much make him the highest-paid quarterback in 2016 I believe. Flacco will make like 100k more.

And if he 7-9 again where does that get him? Here is a section from a Philly writer. Here is why his is getting 22 mill next year. It ain't because he is so great by any means.

• Bradford's $18 million per year average cap number ranks 14th in the NFL among quarterbacks, according to overthecap.com. While Bradford has never been anything close to the 14th best quarterback in the NFL throughout his career, the Eagles were likely to achieve a shorter, less risky deal long-term by paying him a figure higher then many of his more successful peers. That's the trade-off for being able to escape his contract with moderate pain after one year, and no pain after two.

In summary, Bradford's $18 million per year average is more than what he has shown he is worth over his seven-year NFL career. However, he allows the Eagles to maintain continuity for at least one more season in Doug Pederson's first year as the Eagles' head coach. The shorter duration of the deal indicates that the Eagles are not sold on Bradford as a long term answer at quarterback, and they are a near certainty to add to their quarterback pipeline in the draft.

Assuming he stays healthy, Bradford's presence will keep the Eagles competitive in an awful NFC East in 2016 and will allow them to develop a young quarterback or two in the background. For the right to sort of "have their cake and eat it too," the Eagles are paying a high rental fee.

 

[Vitamike]

If the Eagles were convinced he was a franchise QB they would have signed him long term. Instead they want to give him a 2nd try-out year.

Maybe just a little bit more than that, otherwise they may have just used the Transition Tag on him (Of course unless they used it somewhere else, I have no idea) That would get them to a lessor amount (Transition Tags are set at about $18M for the one year of service)

They wanted more, that is why they signed a two year deal, with more guaranteed money in year one.

Much like our Rams, they are vested to the point of, 'Well, we don't want to let him walk and star somewhere else"

That's a slippery slope though, just ask most Rams fans.

 

[Vitamike]

In summary, Bradford's $18 million per year average is more than what he has shown he is worth over his seven-year NFL career. However, he allows the Eagles to maintain continuity for at least one more season in Doug Pederson's first year as the Eagles' head coach. The shorter duration of the deal indicates that the Eagles are not sold on Bradford as a long term answer at quarterback, and they are a near certainty to add to their quarterback pipeline in the draft.

Exactly, if they can get their QB of the future in this years draft, they have 2 years to develop him with the two year contract they signed Sam to.

It also allows the Eagles to hedge their bets with SB should he EVER met his potential.

 

[shopson67]

Sam's best talent seems to be as a money magnet, deserved or not. Regardless of circumstance, he still gets paid.

Signing a cheaper QB and using that savings to bolster the O-line or WR corps would result in a quicker turn-around for the Eagles than overpaying for Bradford. Clearly, he is not the QB of their future (2 year contract), and spending that money on the supporting cast would better set up the next QB up. What is Sam worth over someone like Daniel? Maybe 1-2 wins? That's not going to get them to the Super Bowl, and if their division doesn't tank again, probably won't get them to the playoffs. Will Daniel even get paid half of what Bradford just got?

 

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

Well if it's a "try out year" the 22m guaranteed they're giving him pretty much makes him the highest-paid quarterback in 2016 I believe. Flacco will make like 100k more.

Is that something to be proud of? Ok, he'd be among the highest paid for that ONE year(ONLY because of a screw off payout) but he'll also be an NFL failure, again...Meaning, his next contract won't be anywhere near that much. That's if anyone would even want to bother with a such a failure/loser at that point...

 

[27mtrcougar]

It's a two-way street boys. If Sam has no NFL value to other teams like you guys say then why didnt the Eagles let him make it to free agency? Nobody would've signed him.... and they could've gave him back up money. not $22 million guaranteed?

 

[Vitamike]

Sam's best talent seems to be as a money magnet, deserved or not. Regardless of circumstance, he still gets paid.

Signing a cheaper QB and using that savings to bolster the O-line or WR corps would result in a quicker turn-around for the Eagles than overpaying for Bradford. Clearly, he is not the QB of their future (2 year contract), and spending that money on the supporting cast would better set up the next QB up. What is Sam worth over someone like Daniel? Maybe 1-2 wins? That's not going to get them to the Super Bowl, and if their division doesn't tank again, probably won't get them to the playoffs. Will Daniel even get paid half of what Bradford just got?

Most team fans are socialist regarding their team players finances and capitalist regarding their own.

Here a thought...

If your organization had a hard cap, would you take less to get good people around you for team support?

Even in light of your competitors, with the same hard cap, paying your counter part at their organization a much higher salary than you?​

(I know this doesn't really apply to SB, but it does with others such as Jenkins. Sometimes I forget that this thread is dedicated to SB. )

 

[27mtrcougar]

Sam's best talent seems to be as a money magnet, deserved or not. Regardless of circumstance, he still gets paid.

Signing a cheaper QB and using that savings to bolster the O-line or WR corps would result in a quicker turn-around for the Eagles than overpaying for Bradford. Clearly, he is not the QB of their future (2 year contract), and spending that money on the supporting cast would better set up the next QB up. What is Sam worth over someone like Daniel? Maybe 1-2 wins? That's not going to get them to the Super Bowl, and if their division doesn't tank again, probably won't get them to the playoffs. Will Daniel even get paid half of what Bradford just got?

No Daniel probably won't. He is a back up not a starter. If he's a starter the Rams should be all over him.

 

[27mtrcougar]

And if he 7-9 again where does that get him? Here is a section from a Philly writer. Here is why his is getting 22 mill next year. It ain't because he is so great by any means.

• Bradford's $18 million per year average cap number ranks 14th in the NFL among quarterbacks, according to overthecap.com. While Bradford has never been anything close to the 14th best quarterback in the NFL throughout his career, the Eagles were likely to achieve a shorter, less risky deal long-term by paying him a figure higher then many of his more successful peers. That's the trade-off for being able to escape his contract with moderate pain after one year, and no pain after two.

In summary, Bradford's $18 million per year average is more than what he has shown he is worth over his seven-year NFL career. However, he allows the Eagles to maintain continuity for at least one more season in Doug Pederson's first year as the Eagles' head coach. The shorter duration of the deal indicates that the Eagles are not sold on Bradford as a long term answer at quarterback, and they are a near certainty to add to their quarterback pipeline in the draft.

Assuming he stays healthy, Bradford's presence will keep the Eagles competitive in an awful NFC East in 2016 and will allow them to develop a young quarterback or two in the background. For the right to sort of "have their cake and eat it too," the Eagles are paying a high rental fee.

You guys put too much weight into what these writers write about. They do not work in the NFL. they are not coaches or scouts. those are the people that are paying Sam the money not writers. Again it's a two way street... The contract benefit Sam too. If he has a decent to good year this year the Eagles will almost have to give him an extension or risk losing him to FA the year after. And that will be serious money.