Samuel signs monster-deal with Philly - Page 3

Sveen · 02-29-2008, 01:06 PM

Yes, it happens. Probably every team does it, but I think it will be wrong to say it's OK. Even though it can't be stopped, saying a rule isn't that important is basically the same as removing the whole thing from the rulebooks.

bsaza2358 · 02-29-2008, 01:09 PM

Many teams broke that rule in the past few days. To single the Eagles out for it would be very unfair.

Geo · 02-29-2008, 01:12 PM

I think this helps catapult the Eagles back in the thick of the competing for the division crown. The big question is if the offense under McNabb can deliver, because Johnson's defense will.

To be honest, I still have a suspicion that the Eagles will trade for Roy Williams. If not, maybe they bolster their receiving core another way, athough I don't think the receivers are the problem. McNabb is imo, he needs to play better and be more consistent.

mpt117 · 02-29-2008, 01:17 PM

POSTED 1:53 p.m. EST, February 29, 2008

SAMUEL SET TO JOIN THE FLOCK

Various media reports, collected and referenced by our good friends at SportingNews.com, indicate that cornerback Asante Samuel will indeed sign a contract with the Eagles on Friday.

It's reportedly a five-year, $47.2 million deal. To the casual fan, that's short of the $10 million per year average from the eight-year, $80 million deal signed last year by Nate Clements of the 49ers. As everyone in PFT Planet knows, the Clements deal is actually seven years and $64 million, making it worth a hair over $9 million per year.

Samuel's deal carries an average of nearly $9.5 million. They could have added a phony final year that would have pushed the average to $10 million per year or more, and we respect both sides for doing what looks to be a "real" deal.

Also, there's a certain irony regarding the five-year duration of the contract. Typically, the Eagles like to lock players up for looooong periods of time. As it now stands, Samuel's deal will expire before the contracts signed by some of the young players who cashed in early.

bsaza2358 · 02-29-2008, 01:18 PM

I would love Fitz, but I really like Roy Williams (WR) as an option. I think his attitude could be an issue, but he is an impact player.

Geo · 02-29-2008, 01:21 PM

I don't have a problem with Williams attitude (although I find celebrating touchdowns and first downs when you're down by 20-plus freaking stupid as hell) and I don't think the Eagles do either. The big issue for the Eagles is the long-term extension for Williams.

bsaza2358 · 02-29-2008, 01:24 PM

Williams will be cheaper than his ability and potential, which is nice. I think Detroit wants him out, and I think he wants out of Motown. Not sure if he'll get his way or what he will cost. I think he would be a nice weapon for Donovan McNabb for sure.

GaMeTiMe · 02-29-2008, 01:25 PM

A lot of things can happen here. If we feel we have too much money tied into the CB position (which we don't as of today, but Lito is expected to demand a new contract soon) then Sheppard should be dealt. If we think everything is ok, all three will be kept; Samuel and Sheppard starting, with Brown in the slot and getting occational reps at SS next to Dawkins. It's not a matter of "moving him to safety" like you guys are saying, he'd play both positions on different downs.

Geo · 02-29-2008, 01:28 PM

I'd be surprised if the Redskins didn't inquire about Lito, although maybe the Eagles wouldn't want to trade him to a rival. But if you can get Washington to give up a good return ...

Turtlepower · 02-29-2008, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geo

I'd be surprised if the Redskins didn't inquire about Lito, although maybe the Eagles wouldn't want to trade him to a rival. But if you can get Washington to give up a good return ...

If the Eagles traded Lito in the division, they would be asking for a heck of a lot. I expect a 1st, 2nd, and possibly something in 2009.

bsaza2358 · 02-29-2008, 01:29 PM

The Redskins shouldn't get Lito for anything less than 2 first rounders. That is the cost of having to go against the guy 2x a year for 5-7 years...

D-Unit · 02-29-2008, 01:45 PM

I think this is a great deal for the Eagles now. I'm also happy about it too because we need to extend Newman and if this is the bench mark, then I'm relieved.

I got scared when Oakland gave Kelly $50M, but it looks like the rest of the league is smartening up and the Raiders just screwed their own selves.

Jay · 02-29-2008, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsaza2358

Jay, I think a lot of what happened was that his agent went to teams and explained what it would take to get Asante. Then he talked to Asante and had him list the teams he wanted to go to. Based on how the teams reacted to the contract demand and what the client wanted, the agent scheduled the visit. The Pats knew what it would take to sign Samuel long term, and they chose not to do it.

Most of that is fine, and I buy that. Even though when it comes to the agent, he was pretty specific that they actually had offers to work with. And it's not just the Eagles. It was the Bucs, Saints and Jets too. It's still not right.

Quote:

This kind of stuff is part of life. Even if there were no overt moves, there are always back channel things going on. It is part of life. The Pats have done things like that, and so have every other team.

Yet no one would EVER let me get away with using this same excuse. I would get the "you have no proof" treatment.

That's all I am saying. I want consistency. If you are going to be outraged when teams blatantly break NFL rules, do it for every rule. Be pissed at Belichick for telling Childress they wouldn't pick up one of their practice squad guys if he didn't pick up Garrett Mills. Be pissed that the Packers were turning free cap space in 2007 into extra cap space in 2008 by saying incentives are likely to be earned that have absolutely no shot at being earned (like a long snapper scoring 6 TDs or whatever it was).

I just think it's messed up that teams can do this. I think it's messed up that the Dolphins can be wooing half the Cowboys coaching staff when they were still getting ready for a playoff game. That should irk the hell out of Cowboy fans. What if that cost them the game? It's just not right...

Jay · 02-29-2008, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsaza2358

Many teams broke that rule in the past few days. To single the Eagles out for it would be very unfair.

I am certainly not singling the Eagles out. I've of the belief that the Patriots broke a rule this year that "everyone was doing." But for some reason, people weren't able to shrug that one off...

bsaza2358 · 02-29-2008, 01:50 PM

I agree with you on that pretty much wholeheartedly.

b316 · 02-29-2008, 02:01 PM

Nice maybe they end up keeping all three corners run a 3-3-5

02-29-2008, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay

I am certainly not singling the Eagles out. I've of the belief that the Patriots broke a rule this year that "everyone was doing." But for some reason, people weren't able to shrug that one off...

The keyword here is "belief." You believe that the Patriots broke a rule that everyone was doing. Except here's the catch: there is proof that the Patriots did it, and that is why they lost their 1st rounder in this year's draft. There is no proof that any other team did so. So you can believe all you want, but that doesn't make it true.

Jay · 02-29-2008, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by machoking6

The keyword here is "belief." You believe that the Patriots broke a rule that everyone was doing. Except here's the catch: there is proof that the Patriots did it, and that is why they lost their 1st rounder in this year's draft. There is no proof that any other team did so. So you can believe all you want, but that doesn't make it true.

That's the exact point I am making. You can throw around lines like "everyone was doing it" with tampering but you also have... no proof.

So basically what I am saying is "everyone is doing it" either works all the time or none of the time. Take a pick and be consistent. That's all I am asking.

There is no circumstance that I can think of in which it is OK to break an NFL rule. If they were meant to be broken, they wouldn't be in the rulebook...

02-29-2008, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay

That's the exact point I am making. You can throw around lines like "everyone was doing it" with tampering but you also have... no proof.

So basically what I am saying is "everyone is doing it" either works all the time or none of the time. Take a pick and be consistent. That's all I am asking.

There is no circumstance that I can think of in which it is OK to break an NFL rule. If they were meant to be broken, they wouldn't be in the rulebook...

I never made mention that "everyone" is tampering. I wouldn't make an allegation like that because I have no proof. However, I will say that Belichick is a scumbag and a cheater. Fortunately, there is proof of such, unlike the claim that everyone tampers.

LonghornsLegend · 02-29-2008, 02:21 PM

Im scared to think of what Hall is going to be offered.

Jay · 02-29-2008, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by machoking6

I never made mention that "everyone" is tampering.

That's fine, I was never talking to you to begin with. You just decided to get involved.

Sveen · 02-29-2008, 03:16 PM

Samuels press-conference is coming up soon. I guess it will all be official after that.

bsaza2358 · 02-29-2008, 03:49 PM

Press conference has been pushed back until 5 or 5:15 PM. Things not yet done.

Sveen · 02-29-2008, 03:55 PM

Are maybe there are some second thought about the whole thing ;)

Mr. Stiller · 02-29-2008, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay

That's fine, I was never talking to you to begin with. You just decided to get involved.

He has a point.. You're claiming Tampering with no proof.

Hypocritical?

You complained in every Pats thread about how there wasn't "Proof" of the cheating violations.

Yet you want tampering charges brought about for what you think it tampering without proof?