Philly deadline to get under the cap: Nick Foles

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, Doc said:

The Eagles can/will/should (continue to) say that they want a 1st and 4th for Foles so as to potentially maximize the return for him.  It's not unlike the Bills claiming they wouldn't cut TT and would be fine paying his $6M roster bonus so as to get a team (like the Browns) to bite.  But it doesn't mean anyone will offer anything close to that, or that they would never trade him unless they got that, so Mort's info isn't really new or even worth much.  They'll either trade him or they won't and Mort has no idea what they'll really do. 

 

But those thinking they can simply make a move here or there to get under the cap are grossly misinformed.  The Eagles need to be under the cap in in a little under 74 hours, and they are currently $11.2M over it.  If they want to be players in FA, they need to free up another $5M at least.  Then they'll need to find another $5M to sign draft picks, and another $4M for injuries.  So they're looking at needing to clear $25M or so when all is said and done, and restructuring just kicks the can down the road while designating guys post-June 1st loads up 2019 with a lot of dead cap. 

 

Yes, they need to free up cap space for FA, rookies, and injuries.  The only cap they need to free up NOW is the $10.9M they're over the cap.  And yes, they got to do that by Weds.  And trading Foles only gives them $5.2M, so they still need to do other stuff as well even if they do trade him.

 

I don't think I'm "grossly misinformed" to look at the Eagles cap info and understand that trading Foles is neither necessary nor sufficient to get them under the cap, and while the Eagles will have to make some hard choices, they do have choices they can make.

 

I think it's a pretty good call that Roseman has his plan.  And maybe it involves trading Foles, if that's what he sees as the team's best interest.  But if he does, he'll do it because he gets the return he wants (not the one he's advertising necessarily) and sees it as the team's best path, not because he has to.  The Michael Bennett trade surprised me; I don't see Roseman doing that if he didn't know just where the cap money was coming from.

 

Designating guys post June-1 doesn't work for the purpose of staying under the cap once the league year starts; you may know this,but I'm mentioning it because a lot of people don't realize if a guy is designated "post June 1", it means his full current cap hit stays on the books until June 1.

[Turk71]

1 minute ago, Ittakestime said:

 

You say all that without realizing he was a FA twice and both times signed to be a back up. All of a sudden four games later and he is a franchise QB?!?  Don't buy it. 

After the broken collarbone and the horrible stint with the horrible Rams his stock took a big hit. I would think that his stock is on the rise now and someone will give him a shot as starter.  With his size and pocket passing style,  he could play well into his 30's if he chose.

[mannc]

10 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Yes, they need to free up cap space for FA, rookies, and injuries.  The only cap they need to free up NOW is the $10.9M they're over the cap.  And yes, they got to do that by Weds.  And trading Foles only gives them $5.2M, so they still need to do other stuff as well even if they do trade him.

 

I don't think I'm "grossly misinformed" to look at the Eagles cap info and understand that trading Foles is neither necessary nor sufficient to get them under the cap, and while the Eagles will have to make some hard choices, they do have choices they can make.

 

I think it's a pretty good call that Roseman has his plan.  And maybe it involves trading Foles, if that's what he sees as the team's best interest.  But if he does, he'll do it because he gets the return he wants (not the one he's advertising necessarily) and sees it as the team's best path, not because he has to.  The Michael Bennett trade surprised me; I don't see Roseman doing that if he didn't know just where the cap money was coming from.

 

Designating guys post June-1 doesn't work for the purpose of staying under the cap once the league year starts; you may know this,but I'm mentioning it because a lot of people don't realize if a guy is designated "post June 1", it means his full current cap hit stays on the books until June 1.

As this post and the one it was responding to show, there is a deep reservoir of football knowledge here on TSW.

[BullBuchanan]

On 3/10/2018 at 8:43 AM, Kirby Jackson said:

I have no interest in Foles. Go get a top rookie

 

You guys know you can do both right? The bills are loaded with ammo. When push comes to shove a 2nd will get it done for Foles. The eagles have nothing invested, can't use him, and his value will be 0 once the draft starts.

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, BullBuchanan said:

You guys know you can do both right? The bills are loaded with ammo. When push comes to shove a 2nd will get it done for Foles. The eagles have nothing invested, can't use him, and his value will be 0 once the draft starts.

 

 

His value to the Eagles is very high as long as Wentz isn't back from injury.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

26 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

 

You guys know you can do both right? The bills are loaded with ammo. When push comes to shove a 2nd will get it done for Foles. The eagles have nothing invested, can't use him, and his value will be 0 once the draft starts.

 

Foles will still have high value to the defending Superbowl Champions until Wentz is 100%.

He will also have high value to teams who didn't get what they wanted through FA and the draft, contending teams who lose a starter to injury, or teams whose cherished draft pick this year or last needs more work than they thought.

 

Kidz these days, where do they get these notions?

 

In theory, the Bills could do both, but practically speaking - no.  We can trade a bunch of picks for a QB and sign FA with our cap.  We can sign a FA QB and fill out the roster with picks.  But if we trade picks for a QB and use up a good chunk of cap cash to sign him, practically speaking we're not going to have the ammo to trade up with picks then fill out the roster.

Edited March 11, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan

[Kirby Jackson]

30 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

 

You guys know you can do both right? The bills are loaded with ammo. When push comes to shove a 2nd will get it done for Foles. The eagles have nothing invested, can't use him, and his value will be 0 once the draft starts.

Then why would you part with a 2nd? You need the draft capital to move up (and to fill out the roster).

[Lurker]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Seems to me that insurance policy paid out when it bought the Eagles an NFC Championship and a Superbowl after their starter went out for the season.

I don't think the Eagles are looking to change insurance carriers just yet.

 

I'm also not up for telling the GM of the Superbowl champions how he should run his ship.

 

 

 

LOL.   I'm not telling Roseman what to do any more than other posters on TSW tell Beane what to do.   

 

But in investments and pro sports, it's almost always better to sell too soon than too late.    Getting two high draft picks for an expiring asset just makes sense to me, more so than having an insurance policy that might not pay off.    After all, if Foles is so pedestrian, he probably could never pull another playoff run out of his a$$ like he did this year...

 

Edited March 12, 2018 by Lurker

[Turk71]

54 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

 

You guys know you can do both right? The bills are loaded with ammo. When push comes to shove a 2nd will get it done for Foles. The eagles have nothing invested, can't use him, and his value will be 0 once the draft starts.

 

28 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Foles will still have high value to the defending Superbowl Champions until Wentz is 100%.

He will also have high value to teams who didn't get what they wanted through FA and the draft, contending teams who lose a starter to injury, or teams whose cherished draft pick this year or last needs more work than they thought.

 

Kidz these days, where do they get these notions?

 

In theory, the Bills could do both, but practically speaking - no.  We can trade a bunch of picks for a QB and sign FA with our cap.  We can sign a FA QB and fill out the roster with picks.  But if we trade picks for a QB and use up a good chunk of cap cash to sign him, practically speaking we're not going to have the ammo to trade up with picks then fill out the roster.

There are a lot of possibilities, one of them is maybe Rudolph is the guy they want and the Bills won't have to use any xtra picks to get him.

[billsredneck1]

we will know this week how things may shake out....i cannot wait....day to day.....

[Doc]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

Yes, they need to free up cap space for FA, rookies, and injuries.  The only cap they need to free up NOW is the $10.9M they're over the cap.  And yes, they got to do that by Weds.  And trading Foles only gives them $5.2M, so they still need to do other stuff as well even if they do trade him.

 

I don't think I'm "grossly misinformed" to look at the Eagles cap info and understand that trading Foles is neither necessary nor sufficient to get them under the cap, and while the Eagles will have to make some hard choices, they do have choices they can make.

 

I think it's a pretty good call that Roseman has his plan.  And maybe it involves trading Foles, if that's what he sees as the team's best interest.  But if he does, he'll do it because he gets the return he wants (not the one he's advertising necessarily) and sees it as the team's best path, not because he has to.  The Michael Bennett trade surprised me; I don't see Roseman doing that if he didn't know just where the cap money was coming from.

 

Designating guys post June-1 doesn't work for the purpose of staying under the cap once the league year starts; you may know this,but I'm mentioning it because a lot of people don't realize if a guy is designated "post June 1", it means his full current cap hit stays on the books until June 1.

 

OK, maybe "grossly misinformed" was a bit over the top, but $11.2M is a lot of cap room to have to clear.  I just think that moving Foles is one of the easier things he can do and that given (from what I heard) that they willing to deal him for Tre White and a 3rd, it tells me they are willing to move him.  I guess we'll see soon enough.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

35 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

OK, maybe "grossly misinformed" was a bit over the top, but $11.2M is a lot of cap room to have to clear.  I just think that moving Foles is one of the easier things he can do and that given (from what I heard) that they willing to deal him for Tre White and a 3rd, it tells me they are willing to move him.  I guess we'll see soon enough.

 

$10.9 per spotrac, though what's a measly $0.3M between friends?   The key point is he only clears $5.4M by moving Foles, so he has to do a buncha other stuff too.

 

I think they are willing to deal Foles, but they have a cost/benefit list of various cap-curing actions and Foles is actually on it for something that benefits the team, equivalent to a 1st round pick and a 3rd maybe, which Tre' White and a third would exceed IMO.

[SouthNYfan]

9 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

$10.9 per spotrac, though what's a measly $0.3M between friends?   The key point is he only clears $5.4M by moving Foles, so he has to do a buncha other stuff too.

 

I think they are willing to deal Foles, but they have a cost/benefit list of various cap-curing actions and Foles is actually on it for something that benefits the team, equivalent to a 1st round pick and a 3rd maybe, which Tre' White and a third would exceed IMO.

 

I would be very upset if we traded tre white for foles.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

6 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

I would be very upset if we traded tre white for foles.

 

Me too.  The answer to any such suggestion should be analogous to the answer the Giants gave the Chargers when they asked for Osi Umenyiora as part of the trade for Eli:

"We Do Not Trade Young Pass Rushers"

[Buffalo Barbarian]

14 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Or if they are, it's because there is nothing left

 

Not this year, they are going to keep working with him to get him back on the field.

 

 

[BullBuchanan]

8 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Then why would you part with a 2nd? You need the draft capital to move up (and to fill out the roster).

 

Because if you spend one  2nd to become a major contender today, and spend the other to be a major contender for the next 15 years, it's capital well spent. Effectively that gets the Bills a SB MVP, a blue chip QB prospect,  and two 3rd round picks in the first 65. I'll take that every time. This is why they collected what they did - not to draft some guard.

Edited March 12, 2018 by BullBuchanan

[Lfod]

7 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

$10.9 per spotrac, though what's a measly $0.3M between friends?   The key point is he only clears $5.4M by moving Foles, so he has to do a buncha other stuff too.

 

I think they are willing to deal Foles, but they have a cost/benefit list of various cap-curing actions and Foles is actually on it for something that benefits the team, equivalent to a 1st round pick and a 3rd maybe, which Tre' White and a third would exceed IMO.

That move would cut me deep. I give Nick Foles a ton of credit in the "what if" department for coming in off the bench and getting Superbowl MVP. I'm not even saying it would be a bad move. I just love Tre White.

 

 

 

[aristocrat]

I’d trade Tre to move up in the draft for baker or josh but not for foles

[mannc]

8 hours ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

I would be very upset if we traded tre white for foles.

And if we trade White for Foles, it probably means we will NOT be moving up for a QB in the draft.

[SouthNYfan]

13 minutes ago, mannc said:

And if we trade White for Foles, it probably means we will NOT be moving up for a QB in the draft.

 

Which would be a double whammy