Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Great write up on Eagles' Cap.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Eaglebreath View Post
    From 1999 to 2004, the NFC east sucked, and the NFC was wide open. The Eagles front office worked from a conservative viewpoint, and placed a high priority on cap management. What they did not do was go hard after FA players because it didn't fit their plan to do so. People who were not happy with this approach were not wrong in complaining about it.

    Yes, the Eagles are making the kind of "we're all in" moves that a lot of people felt they should have made early in McNabb's career. I'm very happy they are doing so, because I felt now as I felt then. That if you have a franchise QB in a weak division (although it's not nearly as weak now) you don't worry about 5 years down the road. You try like hell to win now. After seeing the McNabb era go by in the blink of an eye with a lot of heartbreaking playoff losses, and no superbowl titles, there's been a bit of a shift in philosophy.

    I welcome that change, but I'm sure as hell not going to apologize to Banner for complaining about all the GITSWTMSCR trophies, and unearned bonus forwarding in the past, especially early in McNabb's career.
    I agree no one needs to apologize for anything and we all agree they should have been more aggressive in surrounding McNabb with weapons while the D & ST was strong...but we did sign Runyan and Kearse as major FA and the cap management allowed that to happen.

    Some other quibbles:

    The Giants hardly sucked in 2000 since they went to the SB that year and we could not beat them until 2001--they beat us 7 times in a row. They were also 10-6 in 2002, Skins 10-6 in 1999 and Cowboys 10-6 in 2003...I agree we dominated the division and the weakness of our opponents helped in that, but we also had very good teams.

    The NFC being wide open is a bit of a misnomer....in 2000 there were 5 other teams besides the Eagles with 10 or more wins.

    In 2001, the Rams were 14-2, Bears 13-3 and both the 49ers & Packers were 12-4. Rams lost a heartbreaker SB to the Pats and were stacked.

    In 2002, Bucs & Packers were 12-4, Giants & 49ers 10-6...we got soundly beaten by the Bucs in the NFCCG who destroyed the Raiders in the SB.

    In 2003, again 5 other teams besides the Eagles had 10 or more wins. We lost to the 11-5 Panthers in the NFCCG mostly due to injuries (Westbrook & McNabb) and turnovers. Panthers lost the SB to the Pats by an overtime FG.

    In 2004, we had our best chance, the cap management allowed us to get Kearse, Owens and some other pieces, the NFC only had 2 other teams with 10 or more wins...we finally stayed healthy, advanced to the SB and lost to the dynasty Pats by a FG.

    So, its not as cut & dry as it seems...its not like the Eagles had a free pass to the ring every year, they got beaten by several very good teams and there is no gaurantee that 1-2 more FA would have made the difference.
    Eliminate distractions, create energy, fear nothing, and attack everything.

    -Andy Reid

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Vote for Kalas View Post
      we all agree they should have been more aggressive in surrounding McNabb with weapons .
      That's the bottom line. Feel free to quibble all you want. There were some other issues, like the falling out with Trotter because paying a LBer premium money would screw up the cap. Or letting Shawn Barber walk for the same reason. But, the bottom line is that the conservative cap operations to provide a long term window of opportunity plan didn't get it done.

      Comment


      • #18
        And I agree with that line...but the cap discipline allowed for such a long run and so its not as cut & dry again....we may not have had the opportunity in 2004 to load up without it just like we would not have this off-season.

        Thus I do not put the blame on the cap management strategy itself, but rather on the personnel decisions the Eagles made or did not make during that time...draft, trades, FA etc. Mistakes were made that hurt us in depth or starters.

        Thats what is misunderstood IMV....the cap strategy only allows opportunity, it does not gaurantee the proper execution on those opportunities, thats up to the GM, coaches and players which is where I think we fell just short.

        I think we are making better decisions personnel-wise now...the guys we brought in this year, the guys we drafted over the last few years, the coaches we've brought in etc. are going to help, along with the cap discipline that allowed it to happen, us make another run and this time hopefully we will win the only thing we have not yet...
        Eliminate distractions, create energy, fear nothing, and attack everything.

        -Andy Reid

        Comment


        • #19
          [QUOTE=Eaglebreath;189635]Yes, the Eagles are making the kind of "we're all in" moves that a lot of people felt they should have made early in McNabb's career.
          ....
          After seeing the McNabb era go by in the blink of an eye with a lot of heartbreaking playoff losses, and no superbowl titles, there's been a bit of a shift in philosophy.
          QUOTE]

          I take issue with this interpretation - PR aside, they are no more "all in" than they were before. That is PR spin.

          They still have cap room - if they were "all in" they could have signed or dealt picks for one or more linebackers (Posluszny, Tulloch, James Anderson, etc.), they could sign Vick and lower his cap number and use the money to resign Akers or sign a vet kicker/punter or even a vet safety. They haven't done any of those things - they prefer to keep the cap room and picks they have and not steal from the future - the King article points out that other than Nnamdi, no one they brought in has any money promised them beyond this year.

          As someone pointed out upthread, Nnamdi, Babin and Jenkins are no different than Kearse/Owens/Runyan etc. Business as usual, but with more PR spin.

          As for telling people to "apologize", take it easy. It was meant tongue in cheek - not meant to be taken seriously. Just making a point.

          Comment


          • #20
            I love it ... it's just like training camp in here. We went such a long time during the lockout wondering when these posts were actually going to count. And now that the lockout is over and all these threads really matter now, guys are getting chippy. Just like training camp!

            Comment


            • #21
              [QUOTE=longsnapper;189690]
              Originally posted by Eaglebreath View Post
              Yes, the Eagles are making the kind of "we're all in" moves that a lot of people felt they should have made early in McNabb's career.
              ....
              After seeing the McNabb era go by in the blink of an eye with a lot of heartbreaking playoff losses, and no superbowl titles, there's been a bit of a shift in philosophy.
              QUOTE]

              I take issue with this interpretation - PR aside, they are no more "all in" than they were before. That is PR spin.

              They still have cap room - if they were "all in" they could have signed or dealt picks for one or more linebackers (Posluszny, Tulloch, James Anderson, etc.), they could sign Vick and lower his cap number and use the money to resign Akers or sign a vet kicker/punter or even a vet safety. They haven't done any of those things - they prefer to keep the cap room and picks they have and not steal from the future - the King article points out that other than Nnamdi, no one they brought in has any money promised them beyond this year.

              As someone pointed out upthread, Nnamdi, Babin and Jenkins are no different than Kearse/Owens/Runyan etc. Business as usual, but with more PR spin.
              .
              You must have been taking a nap from 1999-2004. Business as usual was we don't build with FAs, we build thru the draft. Outside of Runyan, who they absolutely had to have, they were conservative, and put a premium on cap management. They typically went into the season with the most room under the cap, and they also re-wrote contracts mid to late season with unearnable bonus money in order to forward it to the next season. They let Trotter walk due to the cap. Don't you remember, you can't pay a LBer that much money, it'll ruin your cap???? Seriously.

              And maybe adding playes makes a difference, and maybe it doesn't. But, I'll take the better players every time. So you don't end up with Levon Kirklands fat ass running around, or a washed up Blaine Bishop getting burned by Joey J for a TD that turned around a playoff game.

              And, even if it is all PR, which I disagree with strongly, I'd still rather hear that we have an opportunity, and we're going for it, instead of, we have a plan, and we need to manage our cap effectively in order to compete long term.

              Comment


              • #22
                [QUOTE=Eaglebreath;189696]
                Originally posted by longsnapper View Post

                You must have been taking a nap from 1999-2004. Business as usual was we don't build with FAs, we build thru the draft. Outside of Runyan, who they absolutely had to have, they were conservative, and put a premium on cap management. They typically went into the season with the most room under the cap, and they also re-wrote contracts mid to late season with unearnable bonus money in order to forward it to the next season. They let Trotter walk due to the cap. Don't you remember, you can't pay a LBer that much money, it'll ruin your cap???? Seriously.

                And maybe adding playes makes a difference, and maybe it doesn't. But, I'll take the better players every time. So you don't end up with Levon Kirklands fat ass running around, or a washed up Blaine Bishop getting burned by Joey J for a TD that turned around a playoff game.

                And, even if it is all PR, which I disagree with strongly, I'd still rather hear that we have an opportunity, and we're going for it, instead of, we have a plan, and we need to manage our cap effectively in order to compete long term.
                Ain't that the truth? Didn't we win the Lombardi Cap Championship 10 years in a row? I wonder if this is the new plan. Fire the cannon once a decade.
                "Hey Giants, who's your Daddy?"

                Comment

                Working...
                X