Takeo Spikes Cut

by JasonB on Mar 6, 2008 2:55 PM EST in News Comment 27 comments

Update [2008-3-6 15:7:15 by JasonB]: It's official Per Howard Eskin, the Eagles tried to get Spikes to take a $3 million pay cut this year and he refused. So, he was cut.

Per the Eagles' official site, Takeo Spikes has been cut. The move saves the Eagles $5 million in cap space.

Presumably your starting linebacking corps next season is:

SAM - Chris Gocong
Mike - Stewart Bradley
WILL - Omar Gaither

That's a very young linebacking corps, but potentially a very exciting one.

More importantly though, this cut has my conspiracy gears spinning. Why would the Eagles do it right now? I could see the logic of keeping him until camp to see whether Bradley is the real deal and if Gaither is ready to take over the WILL position... I could also see just jettisoning him before free agency like they did with Kearse...

But why now? Could they have seen cutting TKO as the easiest way to get a big chunk of cap space for something? Is this a sign that a big signing/trade is imminent? Hmm....

By the way, guess who speculated that Takeo Spikes was "on shaky ground" just last week? Ahh yes, just reading the tea leaves.

Oh and PFT is going to have a field day with this one.

Either way, the Eagles average neck size just went way down now that TKO is gone.

Update [2008-3-6 15:47:0 by JasonB]: Maybe this isn't a sign of something imminent.

Spikes told Comcast SportsNet the move has been discussed since last Friday.

"I’m glad it happened when it did, during the free-agency period, so I can sign on with another team," Spikes said.

0 recs | Comment 27 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

WTF...

I understand about the future, but i still think that our young corp of LBs needs a vetern in their presence, which would be no better than Takeo. I am really excited about our LBs but i dont think now was the time to cut Takeo. He still has some gas left in the tank

by anuj on Mar 6, 2008 3:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

agreed

by ck0712 on Mar 6, 2008 7:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow

Just when things were starting to calm down.

And yes, the guys at PFT are going to love themselves for this. Sigh.

Anyway, it could just be the Eagles are doing him the favor of letting him go to market while there's still a lot of money to be spent around the league.

But I hope not -- maybe they actually do have something up their sleeve.

http://www.sporsdork.com

by BFH on Mar 6, 2008 3:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah...

It's fair to say he'd rather be cut now than in camp... so it could be just a nice gesture on their part. Maybe it's just a pure cold financial act...

But I sure hope it's something really good.

You could be in the discussion! Sign up for a free account at Bleeding Green Nation

by JasonB on Mar 6, 2008 3:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Indeed

I seem to remember the Eagles doing a similar favor for another veteran, but since I can't remember exactly who maybe that means I'm wrong.

http://www.sporsdork.com

by BFH on Mar 6, 2008 3:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Link

Here is a link from GCobb.com

http://gcobb.com/content/view/1141/1/

I feel something big on the horizon.

by EricZ on Mar 6, 2008 3:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Takeo

That guy does have the neck of a frickin horse.

by yomjoseki on Mar 6, 2008 3:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Haha...

There was a loading screen with Takeo Spikes (looking REALLY pissed off) in a recent Madden game... me and my friends used to joke that if you didn't draft Takeo in an early round he'd jump out of the screen and kill you.

by yomjoseki on Mar 6, 2008 3:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

FYI

In "former Eagle" news --

The Cardinals signed Dirk Johnson.

http://www.sporsdork.com

by BFH on Mar 6, 2008 3:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

chyeah.

That oughta put them in the Super Bowl.

by yomjoseki on Mar 6, 2008 3:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Just prep work

to free up Fitz for a trade to the Eagles!

by grover on Mar 6, 2008 3:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This is seriously my favorite time

of the year to blog.

I agree with the you all how are waiting for something big... doesnt make sense why they'd cut him unless they need some free cap space for somebody... otherwise there is no way that cutting him makes us better

Its a new season!

by 700 Level on Mar 6, 2008 3:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

When Andy

...was on WIP and was asked about the linebackers and the development of Stewart Bradley, he paused for a moment and then spoke about how he wished TKO hadn't been banged up. I guess this isn't a big surprise, but the timing suggests that a move is definitely on the horizon.

by ajay on Mar 6, 2008 3:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Trade

Is there a reason they didn't trade him instead? No value at his price or something?

by yomjoseki on Mar 6, 2008 4:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Doubt it

You could be in the discussion! Sign up for a free account at Bleeding Green Nation

by JasonB on Mar 6, 2008 4:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

concur

one of the reasons he wasn't cut right away, like kearse, is that they were probably trying to shop him. he said this move had been discussed since Friday, so they've obviously been thinking about it a while.

count me on the side hoping this is a move to free up cap space for a WR signing. i've joined the yardbarker bandwagon and am cheering for fitz or roy dub

by crickles on Mar 6, 2008 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

correction *could be a reason

by crickles on Mar 6, 2008 4:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Spikes Factor

Never has a team that Spikes has been a member of made the playoffs.

...This can only be considered a good thing.

by fuquamanuel on Mar 6, 2008 7:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

im calling it now.

spikes is going to be a Giant. it makes sense the giants lost 2 LBs and one big backer. Plus the nfc east shares players all the time

by NickPampani on Mar 6, 2008 7:34 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

u might have a good call there w/the giants

by ck0712 on Mar 6, 2008 7:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I liked him.

I'm sad to see him go. I know that he's a veteran and all, and really couldn't cover well if put in the zone, but he could shut down runners like it was nobody's business. He was one of the guys who plugged up the holes in the line and could read really well. That's what worries me about not having a veteran in the linebacker core, especially when you're in the 4-3 like we are. You've got 3 guys who aren't exactly Green, but don't have the same ability to read an offense like Trotter or Spikes. You know that if you were a RB you weren't looking forward to running into him...and that massive neck.

by thwalls on Mar 6, 2008 8:19 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

In Other News...

The Titans signed Jevon Kearse. So...they let LaBoy and Odom go but resigned Kearse?

by ajay on Mar 6, 2008 10:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Money vs. Playoffs

We now see where TKO's heart lies and why he has always been a loser in the NFL.

by Andrew on Mar 7, 2008 8:44 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Much harshness towards Spikes... why?

The way the Eagles have been talking the 2008 plan is for Bradley to play Mike, bumping Gaither to Will. Spikes isn't cut out to play Sam which means he'd probably be stuck in a back-up role in Philly.

Which partially explains why the Eagles wanted him to take a pay cut.

My guess is Spikes still fancies himself a starter and he's not willing to settle for a back-up role at this point. Therefore there was no reason for him to accept a pay cut in order to stay on a team that had no intention to make him a starter.

Spikes decision isn't (only) based on money, it's about playing time.

by grover on Mar 7, 2008 11:25 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Forgive me for asking

but I don't understand contracts in the NFL. Was the players association that stupid to sign an agreement that allows teams to cut a player who is under contract? I've seen this going on for a number of years, and I'm always astounded by it. It also seems somewhat unethical that teams can break a contract but players can't. Am I off base here? And cutting a player under contract results in a cap reward for the team that cuts him? Seems like a bonanza for the league, until the next round of labor negotiations.

"Giving up a 97-yard drive with less than 2 minutes to Brian Fucking Griese is one of the most epic collapses you will ever see." - sdf

by Bo Diddle on Mar 7, 2008 10:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

im not an expert

but ill give this a go. im actualy interested in what other people say. as far as i know there are 3? parts to a contract maybe. they are guaranteed money a signing bonus and incentives. it is my impression that at the begining of every year(february 29th this year) the team will have to pay the signing bonus. if the player plays the year they get the guaranteed money and if they play well enough they get the incentives. so a team cutting a player now has to pay something but the cap room they save in what they dont need to pay anymore is more benificial.

as for the players association changing this i cant see it happening because realizing a team has a roster limit of 53 and a team in order to get ready has to usualy sign 20 over that and cut down to the 53 as the off season progresses. this also alot of times works in favor of the player because a team could cut a player that they do not want or need and the player often will/could go out and get more money.

like i said this is just a educated guess you could say. it is what i was able to put together. i am still interested in seeing what people who know better has to say.

by NickPampani on Mar 8, 2008 3:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Contracts

are agreements between the team and the player on what they will pay him for him to work for them. I can only explain it like this, my company is paying for my Masters I had to sign a contract saying I will stay there for at least a year after I graduate. So I can't quit without having to pay them back (sort of like paying back a roster bonus). They can fire(cut) me anytime I won't have to pay them anything but I won't get the rest of my salary. The contract is the obligation of the player not the team, the language can be anyway they want/agree on. That is why you have no trade clauses and the like. My company pays me a lot of money if they can find someone younger with less experience that can do my job they can fire me and pay the new kid less.

by Whodie126 on Mar 8, 2008 3:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs