Eagles realease Mathis

[NDIrishGuy]

I just think you exaggerate to make your point. I think G is a bit more important than 'the most replaceable position' as you describe it. Even K and TE come to mind. And the stats... 9% of your starters??? By that measure, QB Is an even lower %. Is it then less important? If not, then why are you using that stat? I'm not going to get into a back/forth with you over this trivial stuff - it just seems you majorly exaggerate to justify a position. I might even agree with some of your positions. But your rational leaves me scratching my head at times.

Can't entirely defend his position or speak for him, but I think his argument lines up that for a truly important position the same percentage of first round picks (or more) should be used on them. QBs are 4.5% of the starters on a team, but well more than 4.5% of first round picks are used on them, indicating a higher priority position. Just like tackles are 9% of the starters, but more than 9% of first round picks are tackles. If you look at it in that regards I think you can see the point he is trying to make.

 

[I miss Dawkins]

Can't entirely defend his position or speak for him, but I think his argument lines up that for a truly important position the same percentage of first round picks (or more) should be used on them. QBs are 4.5% of the starters on a team, but well more than 4.5% of first round picks are used on them, indicating a higher priority position. Just like tackles are 9% of the starters, but more than 9% of first round picks are tackles. If you look at it in that regards I think you can see the point he is trying to make.

I'm actually a proponent of "NOT" drafting Guards in the 1st. It is definitely a lesser position than T. IMHO you take tackles in the 1st, and guards in the 2nd. It was the rational and his use of stats, to push a position that I differ from. I understand your comparison of % of position:roster to % of position:draft round - but honestly, I'm not sure if that is truly accurate to use as well. A better argument might be made for the average salary of the top 10 of a position - that truly shows 'importance' of a position, as they tend to pay for what is important. For eample, TE is one of the lowest paying positions, and is also one of the fewest picked in the 1st - as is K. That might be more accurate. That point withstanding, I think we all agree on the aspect of importance of the G. But because it is less important than a T - I don't think you then call it the lowest position on the team. Comeon. talk about exaggeration. And like many aspects of football, more has to do with the cohesion of players playing together as well. A bad G can make a great T or C look bad and visa versa.

 

[NDIrishGuy]

1 year deal with Denver reportedly worth up to $4 million....man did he make a big ass mistake.

 

[WIZ]

If he doesn't fire Rosenass tomorrow he's dumber than he looks.

 

[Birds4life81]

Haha nice one schmucks! Idiot could've made more here and still been on a contender.

 

[cdumler7]

Any of you think this has more to do with than just money? Haven't read through this whole thread and maybe need to but from the sound of it he and Chip Kelly never quite clicked. I mean Chip has been trying to trade him pretty much since he got there.

 

[old duke]

Any of you think this has more to do with than just money? Haven't read through this whole thread and maybe need to but from the sound of it he and Chip Kelly never quite clicked. I mean Chip has been trying to trade him pretty much since he got there.

No. Chip liked him, but he asked for a new deal for last year and this, and didn't report to OTAs this year, so Chip gave up on the prima donna. Rosenpuke does this with every new client, and ruins him.

 

[cdumler7]

No. Chip liked him, but he asked for a new deal for last year and this, and didn't report to OTAs this year, so Chip gave up on the prima donna. Rosenpuke does this with every new client, and ruins him.

Ahh thanks for the clarification. I appreciate it.

 

[lpennington]

Wow, 33 years old and you go from $13.5 million on your contract to only $2.5 millon plus up to $1.5 million in incentives. I wonder how Rosenhaus is spinning this to Mathis...

 

[PhillyGreen]

Wow, 33 years old and you go from $13.5 million on your contract to only $2.5 millon plus up to $1.5 million in incentives. I wonder how Rosenhaus is spinning this to Mathis...

Mathis truly is a dumbass. I read on Philly.com that he claims to have turned down money that would have paid him what his salary would have been here. He turned it down because the team in question was not ready to contend. I call bullshit on that and surely he does not think anyone is stupid enough to believe that.

Granted the last couple years of his deal was not guaranteed but for a vested player like himself it is a moot point because if he is on the roster for game 1 of the season his full salary becomes guaranteed.

 

[eaglesnut]

So he lost money and rosenhaus made money.

Someone should serve up rosenhaus to some Nazi's. Btw when I type rosenhaus on my phone it inserts euthanasia.

 

[old duke]

So he lost money and rosenhaus made money.

Someone should serve up rosenhaus to some Nazi's. Btw when I type rosenhaus on my phone it inserts euthanasia.

Absolutey correct! Most of us remember how Rosenpuke ruined TO for us.

 

[deerpathdave]

evan mathis - Twitter Search

Mathis is taking a beating...as is Peyton.

 

[SixthStreet]

Mathis probably didn't get the work he needed in the offseason to start the year off right. Both by his decisions and NFL teams' decisions to not bring him in earlier in camp. I think he will round into form by midseason. I'm still ok we moved on. Our Gs are not world beaters but they are not much worse than Mathis.

 

[deerpathdave]

Mathis probably didn't get the work he needed in the offseason to start the year off right. Both by his decisions and NFL teams' decisions to not bring him in earlier in camp. I think he will round into form by midseason. I'm still ok we moved on. Our Gs are not world beaters but they are not much worse than Mathis.

Yeah, its simply really hard to work out as hard on your own as you do when you are in the team environment. Mathis as much as anyone should understand it, and that a 33 year old, need to work even harder to stay in shape. That is why it didn't sit well with Kelly that he skipped OTAs and decided to move on. It's everyone's loss that Mathis didn't report for OTAs, but I think at that point it is the right decision to move on.

 

[DaEagles]

Our OL was worth without him

 

[WIZ]

5 million was crazy money for him and he wanted more. You can't keep that guy.

 

[DaEagles]

Our OL is much much worse without him

 

[ctc]

Yeah, its simply really hard to work out as hard on your own as you do when you are in the team environment. Mathis as much as anyone should understand it, and that a 33 year old, need to work even harder to stay in shape. That is why it didn't sit well with Kelly that he skipped OTAs and decided to move on. It's everyone's loss that Mathis didn't report for OTAs, but I think at that point it is the right decision to move on.

Clearly all that off season non-mandatory workout stuff that was so crucial in determining who should stay and who should go was meaningful wasn't it.

 

[Birds4life81]

great thread,



a few months from now

Haha you nailed that one. Everyone should go back and read DPD's posts, lol.