Random notes from around the NFCE: Osi leaving NY, some TE talk, and a few new podcasts

• Tommy and I recorded two shows last night:

• It doesn’t look like Osi Umenyiora will be back with the Giants this year, per Mike Garafolo:

Osi 1

• The Eagles talked with Nnamdi Asomugha agent Ben Dogra today at 9:30, per Jeff McLane. “Hi, I’m agent Ben Dogra, you my remember me from Eagles free agency disasters Nnamdi Asomugha and Steve Smith.” Please Lord, do not let me hear the word “restructure” today.

• Blogging the Boys has a nifty little sortable chart of offensive linemen measurements from the Combine. I think it’s cute that they think Jerry Jones is going to draft offensive linemen. :)

• And here’s a sortable chart for TEs. All 4 NFCE teams could be TE shopping in this draft. Very deep and talented position this year. One TE that somebody recently asked me about on Twitter was Jared Cook of the Titans. I replied that the Titans would almost certainly tag him before they’d let Cook test free agency, since the tag number for TEs is very reasonable. However, it appears that Cook may test his designation as a TE. He may claim that he is more as a WR, and that if the Titans want to tag him, they’ll have to do so as a WR, according to Jim Wyatt of the Tennessean. That would mean a huge difference in pay, and if Cook can win that appeal, the Titans might be more inclined to let him walk. That’s something to keep an eye on – Cook can play.

• More TE stuff. Here’s a good breakdown of Rice TE Vance McDonald by my buddy Mark at Hogs Haven. I saw McDonald drop more than a few passes at the Senior Bowl week of practices (as Mark notes), but a lot of people think highly of him as a prospect.

• I don’t mean to pick on Paul Schwartz here, especially since all the NY writers do this, but when a free agent is asked directly whether he would like to play for (name any team), he’s going to say yes… as in, every time. In fairness to Paul, at least Dwight Freeney mentioned that he grew up a Giants fan, which is notable, but articles of this nature are typically completely useless in terms of trying to figure out where a player may sign. Just a pet peeve of mine.

Be sure to follow Blogging the bEast on Twitter and like Blogging the bEast on Facebook.

11 Comments

  1. Greg says:

    Thats strange. I initially thought there was a clause like that but then why is everyone saying the eagles will have to pay 4m if they cut him. Thats what Ive been seeing in al the stories, so I decided that was probably in another CBA in another sport. If the eagles only have to pay the difference, then the decision to cut him seems a lot easier.

  2. Paradox_What says:

    Our prayers have not been answered: The restructure lingo has been spoken.
    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/22/nnamdi-asomugha-will-get-cut-if-he-wont-take-a-pay-cut/

  3. Greg says:

    Since 4m is gauranteed, we can afford to accept more than other teams. For example, if he restructured to 7.5m, then we are only paying 3.5m more than if we cut him. The real question then would be is he better than someone we could get for 3.5m (since the cost would be the same either way).

    As for the other corner, I remember a quote no one mentions any more where DRC said last season he wasnt worried about the money and just wanted to stay in philly. He played better than Nnamdi and is younger. I think we should definately keep him.

    Problem is I just dont see how we can keep both of them. This team has to be shaken up somewhat, doesn’t it? I cant imagine returning with all the same players again. I think the Eagles have some real hard decisions to make because a lot of these players can come cheap, but at the same time they need to try to create a new system and a team that fits the system, not to mention that shaking up the players can bring a fresh attitude. They aleady chose to keep vick. If the players come cheap enough then I reluctantly support these moves.

    1. “The real question then would be is he better than someone we could get for 3.5m (since the cost would be the same either way).”

      That’s exactly the question, and my preference would be to find a younger guy for $3.5.

      1. Paradox_What says:

        Quick clarification: From the Nnamdi contract details that are available, the 4m owed is guaranteed and does not offset if Nnamdi is signed by another team. This means the 4m is a “sunk cost” that is immaterial to any contract renegotiations between Nnamdi and the Eagles. We would be competing with other teams to acquire Nnamdi’s services on an equal plateau, not with a 4m “advantage” as Greg alluded to. You’re right to highlight the 3.5m figure, but that is only if other teams valuate Nnamdi at that pricing point (and not at say 7.5m). [If I am wrong and the guaranteed portion offsets, kindly disregard]

        1. Greg says:

          If what you are asking is they are allowed to renegotiate gauranteed money under the current CBA, I honestly dont know. The point I am making is that our total offer to him including the 4m guaranteed should be viewed as 4m less. This is like calculating “pot odds” in poker. The dead money does not influence our future decisions.

          I wasn’t trying to say we can offer 4m more than other teams. I am simply saying that a 7m contract from the eagles is like a 3m contract from another team. For another example, if the new contract was 4.5m including the gauranteed money, that would effectively be like paying only 500k. Because if we cut him and signed someone else for 500k we would end up paying the same amount.

          1. Greg says:

            In second thought that poker analogy didnt work at all. The money in the pot still influences the pot odds. Not sure what i was thinking of.

            1. Paradox_What says:

              Upon reflecting, we said the exact same thing in different ways. Your first sentence threw me off (“Since 4m is gauranteed, we can afford to accept more than other teams”), but you have the correct idea. Us offering 7.5m is equal to another team offering 3.5m because he gets the 4.0 either way. Thus the 4.0 is a sunk cost (like your dead money analogy).

              They cannot renegotiate the guaranteed money. An offset clause entails allowing a team to “offset” the guaranteed amount based on how much another team pays the player. For example if Nnamdi’s 4.0m offsets and Clevelend signs him for 3.0m, we would only owe the difference (1.0m).

              1. Greg says:

                Thats strange. I initially thought there was a clause like that but all the reports i read said the eagles would pay 4m if they cut him, which led me to believe I was thinking of a different CBS fron another sport. If they only owe him the difference then the decision to cut him seems a lot easier.

              2. Greg says:

                Thanks for the clarification. Sounds to me like the eagles would then owe him nothing. Would this also take his salary off our cap figure?

      2. AJ says:

        The problem is can you get a younger guy for 3.5 mil or less that’s a clear upgrade. The younger guy is going to want a multi year deal, whereas Nnamdi’s restructure will be a one and done. Signing a young JAG does nothing this year if he isn’t better than Mr. Poupon, and it would handcuff us next year to another mediocre corner.

%d bloggers like this: