BearFan PHX

I agree. I don't think Foles is bad, but even Mahomes looks awful without an OL in front of him. This is ALL on Pace.

I agree with your assessment of Minchew's potential role. I think youre right about Foles being the day 1 starter with a high pick rookie QB waiting in the wings. Therefore, I would not be spending any draft capital, even a low pick, on a QB that will be the #3 by midseason. THis team isnt deep enough to be spending on that kind of insurance. We need that pick somewhere else more.

The best thing about Wentz is no guaranteed money for at least two years, so you can cut or trade him at any time. Also to those saying he would have no trade value, realize that the team that gets him after us would also have no guaranteed money issues with his deal.

agree

I agree that they should not trade future picks this year.

well said, he is not what he once was.

because their contracts re coming up, and tying yourself to them for 4 more years is a very bad idea. They havent shown that they can do this, so its time to try someone new. there are only two ways to get a coach - you either hire someone who has already been a head coach and fired for some reason, or you elevate a coordinator to first time head coach, and hope they are good. When we hired Nagy, that was a fair question. Could he be a great head coach? But he isnt an unknown now, hes a bad head coach. The same things he screwed up at KC he screwed up here,mainly play calling and getting away from the run. I dont see any argument for keeping him at all. I dont even know why you'd want to? Also why do you think Pace would make choices like those 80s drafts? He had the #2 pick overall, and we got Mitch Trubisky. He chose a head coach and we got Matt Nagy.

yeah but you can trade Wentz again after next year and get the pick back...

If we trade our #1 this year for Wentz, we get a guy we can trade next year if the next GM doesnt want him with no cap hit, and get our first rounder back and more. Because there is no guaranteed money, this first rounder is recyclable, and if he plays well, he'd be worth even more. Remember we would be giving Foles too, so the next GM could get a first and more, maybe even 2 firsts for him. This is a pretty good move in my opinion. He can be traded or cut at any time with no penalty, no matter what happens.

The Eagles may just be looking to draft a QB int he first round this year. Maybe they never loved Wentz, and were disappointed in how Pederson developed Jalen Hurts, and maybe the management wanted someone other than Hurts, and Pederson won that argument on the basis that he was the QB whisperer, and now they want to sent Wentz while he still has value, and use their 6th overall pick to take another shot at QB, and maybe they wanted the new coach to be the one to make that choice. That would explain why Wentz wants out now too.

If the trade results in a QB we can cut or trade after next year with no cap penalty, then your fears are mitigated. For example, Wentz's situation. And as long as no future picks are used to get him, then what you (and I) worry about cant be a problem.

the OTs sure looked like it.

One big plus for Wentz is that you can cut him without a cap hit at any point, so the next staff isn't saddled with anything. If it includes any future picks Im against it, but this year's first, Miller and Foles for Wentz? sure. Even without gettign Wentz cheap, that's a bonus. I agree there likely wouldnt be another pick coming back. If there was, that would be amazing. Maybe that's what's going on right now, thyre saying 7th were saying 2nd, haggling to a 5th to a 3rd. cool.

theyre both so good, this is a great matchup - best in a while. Historical implications of this one. I'm rooting for both of them. I guess some time in the 4th quarter I'll find out which I like better, but right now, I really don't know. Tom Brady is amazing, but if Mahomes takes it and makes a run, that'll be amazing to see too.

That could be the best thing you can say about him! Maybe he will ignore Nagy and do the right thing LOL

yes, youve identified a huge problem here - you have a coach and GM trying to win now, and a franchise that needs a longer view. To not have fired them is not only going to screw next year, but the influence of the moves they make at QB will be felt potentially for years after. This now, is a failure of McCaskey and Phillips.

youre right, but what a crazy world where you lose Hicks but keep Leno - only the NFL could come up with a system that makes that make sense.

yeah we are all on the same page here - not attacking the messenger, just going over all the scenarios.

I guess the only reason youd trade Mack is for high picks, and the only way you could justify all that dead money would be if you drafted a rookie QB, and figured that you werent paying his vet salary which would be similar. It's kind of like how we could afford Mack in the first place, because we had a rookie QB in Trubisky. But in the real world, Mack is a bear for 2021.

but why would we destroy our cap to trade Mack? It would cost us $37 Million. The only way I see it is if we trade Mack for a first, and use at least one if not both of them on a QB in the first round the we think is the future. Then youre paying a rookie deal for the QB, so you can think of Macks $ as what a vet QB would have cost.

agree, and of course the contract was designed for exactly that purpose - when a player can demand it, having upfront money guarantees the player cant get cut so easily, and will get their salary portions too.

Actually Wentz will be a relative bargain since a decent chunk of his contract will stay on Philly's cap, assuming he is willing to play under his deal here, and doesnt demand to renegotiate some up front money from us. It'd be 6 to 10 million cheaper per year for us. Im not sure how some of the options are counted etc. But hed be more like 22 to 27 Mil not 33 But even as a "bargain" he'd still be getting real starter money, so you have to think he is your guy, and not draft a QB to start for the next few years. I hate the idea.

yeah but Mack's guaranteed money doesnt go with him in a trade, it hits us all at once, rather than being spread out over years as it is now. If we trade him, we must pay $37 Million on our cap this year NOT to have him. Next year it's 12 Million, and then you can dump him then or the next year if you want to. Now if we make him a poost June 1st "cut" then we can spread that 37 Million over the next two years, but I dont think we get to do that in a trade. We just cant afford to trade him this year unless we are willing to burn the 2021 season to the ground to get 2022 picks. The Cubs did that for a few years and won the World Series. Im not saying it cant be done or is a bad idea, but it does nothing for Nagy and Pace who are trying to keep their jobs, so I dont think Mack can be traded under any theory. If he has a big year next year with Goldman next to him THEN you could get something for him and afford to do it after next season. Or keep him.

agree, and if you have to trade up to get a worthy one in the 1st, thats fine with me as long as you dont trade future 1sts to do it. Hell, I guess Id be ok with them trading a future first if we thought the real deal was there, at least well still have the player after Pace goes. I just dont want to see future 1sts traded for someone like Wentz.

I dunno, but the cap ramifications make it impossible unless you get a corresponding impact player who is willing to continue to play under a contract where THEIR guaranteed money stays with Denver... If you get draft picks, then you're willing to field a terrible team in 2021 for future value, like the Cubs did for a few years. And that's a great idea honestly, but it makes it impossible for Nagy or Pace to keep their jobs. I mean, the conspiracy theory says that McCaskey knows this, and is willing to do it, and Nagy and Pace have to just eat it as punishment, but stick around anyway because they have to or something. But McCaskey's not that smart, and Nagy and Pace would quit. We are screwed for at least a couple years.