Dawkins: "I wanted to be an Eagle"
by JasonB on Mar 4, 2009 10:19 AM EST
in Philadelphia Eagles News
Email
PrintYesterday 950 ESPN scored an interview with Brian Dawkins that they will run in it's entirety today, but they did send out a few clips to tease... 
"Denver came out of the jump, and we didn’t have to prompt them to offer me anything," Dawkins said. "They came out the jump just like this. Not quite where it is right now, but it was close to that. We didn’t have to ask for anything. This is what they came out with, wanting me there. They made it clear right away that I’m not a ‘want’ there, that I’m a necessity. They feel they need me here."
"I would say they opened my eyes right away that this was a business deal. That it wasn’t about me being who I am to the team. It was about my age, and it was a business decision. And that really hurt."
"I did not want to get to free agency," Dawkins said. "I’ve never gotten to free agency, I’ve never gone to free agency. I’ve had years in the past where I could have collected big bucks on the open market, but I did not want to get there. So why would I want to get there all of a sudden now on my last contract? I wanted to be an Eagle. And they denied that."
Not much surprising about the interview, I think we all pretty much assumed that this was how it went down. The Eagles simply don't pay players in their mid 30s lots of money, and Dawkins felt that he would be an exception to that rule(he was given a new contract at 32). He wasn't.
Dawkins also said, "What I was offered was … that was it," Dawkins said. "No one gave me any impression that there would be any flexibility in it.
Two sides were playing this game. The Eagles didn't "deny" his opportunity to be an Eagle. He just wantd more money. This is not to say he didn't deserve more money or that the Eagles didn't simply lowball him as a sign that were ready to move on... it's just a statement of fact.
I love Dawkins, I think I've made that clear. However, I don't buy his melodrama here. He made a business decision just like the Eagles did. Do I believe he wanted to remain an Eagle? Yes... but not that much. He could have stayed if he wanted. Just like the Eagles may have wanted him back, but not that much. Obviously they could matched his offer if they wanted to.
No one should "hurt" by this deal. They both made the same decision.
77 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good point
Two choices were made:
1. We offered him a low-ball contract
2. He chose to leave
That being said, I hope this doesn’t turn into some type of back-and-forth. I hate when players leave a team and talk badly about their old team. It’s over – nobody likes it – but we have to move on.
I don't think it will...
I think much like Trotter, he will regret leaving and not be in his element in Denver…eventually he will come back to Philly after he retires and be an Eagle again – most likely with the media…
I don't think so either
At least I hope not. I’m putting this whole thing behind me. I enjoyed the 13 years he played here, respect the decision he made, and will welcome him back with open arms when he chooses to retire.
Now, onto the 2009 Eagles!
Contract
If they want to bring in some young talent, I just dont get why they are going to bring Shawn Springs. Why would they not be willing to spend money on Dawk but they are willing to spend money on a 33 yr old CB
Mike T.
Good point, but they were willing to spend money on Dawk, just not THAT much money. And if Springs is signed, it probably won’t be that big of a contract.
by southjersey89 on Mar 4, 2009 10:37 AM EST up reply actions
3 years in age makes a big difference in physical decline. Additionally, we don’t know what role Springs will fill. There’s a big difference between having a 33 year old backup corner and a 36 year old starting free safety.
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
Andrews
What do you guys think of Stacy Andrews? Spadaro seems to make a big deal about him, but we dont even know if he will be ready for the season opener bein that he had knee surgery not that long ago.
Mike T.
minus the surgery, he was the top guy at his position in FA, and probably one of the top 5 overall FAs. he’s extremely large and can pretty much dominate anyone. if he’s ready to go, which we’re probably fairly confident in, it’s an excellent signing. even if he’s not ready to go this year, his contract is so incentive laden, that it’ll be a good person to sit on till next year as well
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
Yeah
I’ve heard a few NFL scouts on various websites saying that an ACL injury is not a major problem for O-linemen. It sound strange, but the point they make is that these guys don’t have to really run or cut like skill position players. They can just tape up the knee and play. It will definitely limit him, but it’s not like an ACL injury for a running back or wide receiver.
Yeah, plus according to him he is way ahead of schedule in the rehab process for what its worth.
by southjersey89 on Mar 4, 2009 10:55 AM EST up reply actions
also the ACL wasn't on his plant leg
for what its worth, and assuming he’s playing RT, the ACL was on his right leg. at RT, you plant on your left. (i think i got my right and left right.. right?)
by afk_football on Mar 4, 2009 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
you are correct sir
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
Spadarao makes a big deal about everyone the Eagles bring on board.
His draft day coverage online with Merril Reese last year remains the most amusing train wreck I have every seen. It took all of 30 minutes for Spads to make the transgression from “Eagles just traded for Lorenzo Booker!? Who’s that!?” to “He’s the next Brian Westbrook” and “The two of them in the backfield together will be the deadliest thing, since the HIV”
by andyreidswaistline on Mar 4, 2009 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
Actually...
There IS another way to do things. Don’t lowball him. Sign him to a fair contract. Or at the worst let him go and see what he can get in free agency, then match it and let him know if he signs it that he won’t be playing as much as before. Roster him for his locker room presence and his presence in the city, have him mentor the younger players, play him in situations where he can be successful and his age isn’t so much a factor, and let the guy retire an Eagle. We have 40mil+ cap room. You mean to tell me we can’t afford 2 years / 9mil? Yes, the NFL is a business, but we’re talking about treating an employee with respect. Dawkins regularly passed up bigger paydays to stay with us, never caused a contract issue, and was a constant example and presence in the locker room. That’s worth a retirement bonus, imo.
The only way I see the Eagles having done the right thing in this regard would be if the whole Dawkins legend had gotten bigger than him and become annoying to the players. If he actually was out of touch with some of the younger players, or if his presence was stopping the younger guys from growing… well in that case I can understand the Eagles letting him go.
ridiculous … first the reports are the offered him 4-5 mill which isn’t a low ball offer its a raise. Second Denver over paid making Dawkins the highest paid safety in the league (cap number) … we weren’t going to do that just for a locker room presence. Why pay a guy more money for a diminished role. The Eagles could afford to match but it’s not the best decision for our team.
This is why we are fans and they are the FO they don’t make moves based on emotion. You can’t work based on emotion in business or you will get burned every time.
"I need to do a better job of putting players in the right position to perennially come up short of expectations"
I forget who said it...
“If you spend all your time listening to the fans, soon enough you’ll be sitting with them.”
Wasn't one of the highest paid safeties...
Looking at it objectively, B-Dawk lost a step I agree, but the fact is that he did make the pro bowl which would make him a top safety in the league…he wasn’t even inside the top 10 salaried safeties last year…Its not about the amount of money, its about how that compares to what the market is…
If your job gives your a 1K raise and everyone else is making 10-20% more than you, even though you have better performance reviews, would you say its not a low ball offer, its a raise?
okay… we need to take a step back and speak about this Pro-Bowl debate of yours. i’m not trying to be a smart ass, but you honestly think the Pro-Bowl voting truly reflects who the best players are certain positions are? You really think Brett Favre was the third best QB in the AFC? This is the team that is picked by the fans, most of whom don’t know their asshole from the elbow. This is the same team that Quintin Mikell didn’t make, although he had better numbers than the individuals who did make the team. If you really want to evaluate who the best players are at a position, please reference the All-Pro Team.
Saying any player is the one of the best players at their position because they made the Pro-Bowl will only get you laughed at. You really think the fans know how to vote an offensive lineman into the Pro-Bowl?
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
What do you think?
I think BDawk was let go becaue the staff didn’t want to cut him if we signed him to a multiyear contract. We got to be honest about that Denver deal, he isn’t gonna finish it out, he is gonna get cut in some time, likely 2 years.
I understand why we only offered 1 year, at least at the end of the season he can retire, and if he is good, we offer 1 more year. But if we sign him 2 or more years, he gets cut. Imagine the media and PR explosion at that point. BDawk left with his head up high, he deserved that. Not going out like Douglas and Trotter.
City of Champions!
yeah that’s where i stand… i think he plays well the first six games this year, then starts to get exposed/eaten up… he’ll get phased out a bit over the course of the season. Denver is going to have a tough choice next year. Either cut him in the offseason, or try to see what happens and maybe end up cutting him mid-year. i think its’ going to be a tragic end and i’ll feel bad when it happens
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
I hate to say it, but you know when we play him, we are throwing at him!
I see him forcing a fumble on BWest in that game, and maybe a good hit or two on Basket or Avant. But we are gonna run stuff his way all game, especially if we have a have decent tight end. They will be forced to take him off the field by the end of the game.
I wish the best for him though.
City of Champions!
oh god… honestly, as soon as this happened, one of my first coherient thoughts after i was done being mad was, “all i know is, we better run seam routes at him all day when we play Denver… Lots of 3 and 4 WR sets so he has to cover someone”
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
Now that's funny ...
… and wise.
+1
I think Denver should make him an SS, honestly. They signed like six other safeties.
we offered him one year
So we offered him the same 4-5 mil for the first year, but it was a one year contract not a two year.. i dunno. why not just do a two year and if he’s clearly lost a step then cut him? it’s a minor salary cap consideration and it’s not ridiculous. remember when eskin was interviewing fitzgerald last offseason and eskin suggested the eagles? the first words out of fitz’s mouth were something to the effect about the Eagles being cheap and all business. go back to that interview, fitzy hesitates. if the reputation around the league is that the Eagles are going to cut vets like Dawk without blinking then there will be a good number of players that don’t think of us first.
but i do still think the point about Dawkins’ presence getting to be too big and stopping other players from maturing is a good one.
by afk_football on Mar 4, 2009 11:52 AM EST up reply actions
why not just do a two year and if he’s clearly lost a step then cut him?
You need to first realize how contracts work and are worded. Dawk got a 4 year from Denver, with guaranteed cash we weren’t willing to guarantee him that much money and we shouldn’t have.
The deal they reported we offered him was more then fair … he chose money and financial security I would have done the same thing. I also wouldn’t have over paid him, I think both sides made the best all be it toughest decision for them.
"I need to do a better job of putting players in the right position to perennially come up short of expectations"
pft just posted about it was only 3 mil we offered, plus injury protection
http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/03/04/details-on-dawkins-offer-in-philly/
seems like a lowball to me.
i agree that cutting him would have been a big fan outcry, but we cut trot IN TRAINING CAMP… and we woulda cut dawk long before that.
by afk_football on Mar 4, 2009 12:06 PM EST up reply actions
Its not about money with Dawkins, its about having to CUT A LEGEND if he proves to decline.
I only use caps, not to yell, but to emphasize my point. No disrespect meant.
City of Champions!
I agree with you … it’s better to let him go and cash in then to sign him to a deal and cut him. The Eagles probably helped Dawk out but making Denver over pay him.
"I need to do a better job of putting players in the right position to perennially come up short of expectations"
yup, BDawk left with his head up.
The fans would have trashed them next year by cutting him. Thats not showing respect for a Hall of Famer.
The Eagles did him a huge favor by letting him walk. He will likely get cut after 1 or 2 years in Denver.
Heck, there was talk about Dawkins possibly getting cut last year after he got smoke in preseason a few times. People were all over his declining play. I am happy he left when he did. He left on his terms and cashed a final huge check.
City of Champions!
I have to see the contract to see if he went where the money is.
We all know those contract are filled with “Funny money” and bogus years. So we need to see what is guaranteed. I dont know those figures to determine if he went after the money.
I think the Eagles let him go because they didn’t want to cut him at the end of the year. Lets face it, Dawk may have 1 or 2 years left (maybe 3) but I doubt that.
Say we signed him for 2 years, and he stinks up the joint., and gets burned again a few times. What to they do, do they Jerimiah Trotter him and just cut him? It was more prudent on they’re part to offer 1 year and see where it goes from there, may be they would have recommended retirement to avoid a shocking cut. But ultimately it was gonna happen, HE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN CUT AFTER THIS YEAR. So I can’t fault the Eagles in allowing him to leave on his terms.
City of Champions!
Also, I think that Dawkins departure is only such a big deal because we didn't
sign many players. We would be singing a different tune if they brought in Jason Brown (they blew that one). Even signing Leonhard for some depth. (heck Rex Ryan likes him, he can’t be that bad, he’s gotta be better than considine).
Lets give them some time to see what we do with trades and draft.
(Edwards and/or Boldin may be traded), that wouls shut everyone up about Dawkins.
City of Champions!
was it a smart business decision, maybe. the thing that got me was ike reese said right after it happened and again from hugh douglas the other morning on WIP. they seemed to speak with some conviction that the front office was pretty crass in their approach to dawkins on the situation. pretty much they had a conversation telling what he COULDNT do anymore, and then told him that if he didn’t like it to go ahead and test the market. now i dont know how true this is, but if it is, thats pretty messed up. heres a guy that took the hometown discount his entire career here and probably would have one last time to stay with the team and city he loved. i guess when it comes down to it only dawk and the office knows what really went down. all i can say is that im a fan of his and i wish him well(except when he faces the birds)
I just read this on GCobb.com. If true, it is absolutely wrong by the Eagles. Please tell me what you thing?
Written by Garry Cobb
Wednesday, 04 March 2009
I can’t believe what I just read about the offer which the Eagles made to Brian Dawkins.
According to Mark Eckel of the Trenton Times, the Eagles offered Dawkins a contract where they were going to ask him to pay back money for any games he missed.
Here’s how it read on NJ.com.
"DAWKINS REDUX
Word was out that the Eagles did something in their negotiations that didn’t sit well with Dawkins. We found out what it was.
Not only didn’t the team move from its $3 million offer, but it wanted Dawkins to include a clause in the contract that he would have to pay money back to the team for any game he missed.
That is almost unprecedented, especially for a player of Dawkins’ stature."
How could the Eagles have the nerve to make such demand to Dawkins? This is reprehensible for a team to do this.
I can understand making him an offer but having the audacity to offer a player who you claim to love a contract where you ask for money back for any games he misses. That’s on another level.
City of Champions!
Holy shit
FUCK G COBB … this guy is a clown.
I also read that Sheldon Brown was upset with his contract after Lito cashed in on a big pay day. To bad Lito’s contract has stipulations out the ass Garry.
"I need to do a better job of putting players in the right position to perennially come up short of expectations"
haha PFT isn’t much better, it’s called the Rumor Mill for a reason
"I need to do a better job of putting players in the right position to perennially come up short of expectations"
and this is jerk off Mark Eckel reporting all of this shit.
this is people being bitter … I take it as nothing more then that.
"I need to do a better job of putting players in the right position to perennially come up short of expectations"
I meant to type "I hope you are right"
I am sleepy today bro, I’ve been messing up replies all day.
City of Champions!
PFT explains it much better than the Trenton Times ...
… saying the asked him to give money back is dead wrong and either sloppy or meant to drum up hits for the TT.
Frankly, I think people are predisposed to side with the player they love instead of the front office guy they never see on stuff like this.
Jason summed it up best:
I love Dawkins, I think I’ve made that clear. However, I don’t buy his melodrama here. He made a business decision just like the Eagles did. Do I believe he wanted to remain an Eagle? Yes… but not that much. He could have stayed if he wanted. Just like the Eagles may have wanted him back, but not that much.
In my case, not true
I have very rarely sided with a player in these scenarios over my not so illustrious sports viewing life. This is the first case I can remember where I have.
The bottom line for me is that they had plenty of available money to spend and did not do it. And from a football sense, this will hurt the team. If it was 10-20 mil he was getting for 2 years, ok good decision. But it is wasn’t. It was 4-4.5 million per season.
He “could” have stayed but we still don’t have any real idea on what his offer was. I can’t blame him for taking more money in this case as much as I can blame the FO for not at least paying him 4 mil for two years.
Well you are a rare one ...
… because we all wanted Taylor, Vincent, Duce, Douglas, Simon and Trotter back, and we all wanted the FO’s heads on a platter when they weren’t re-signed.
Besides the Eagles making another NFCCG run with a mostly new cast being proof of this, there are tons of examples of a team losing a key player — even one with leadership credentials — and being plenty good the following year.
Tiki Barber retired and the Giants won the Super Bowl the following year. Strahan retired and the Giants were the No. 1 seed in the NFC.
Losing a top guy does not necessarily doom your team if the foundation is strong.
Banner is a genius and has 100's of championships
This is the motto I get frustrated when reading through these blogs. The fans are all idiots and the front office is bunch of geniuses who have put together a contender year after year. That is why they are in their position and we are in ours. Of course, we could say the same thing about the Detroit front office. I wonder if you put a bunch of us idiots in charge of that organization if we could do any worse. Oh that is right, it is not possible to do any worse. So maybe the professionals CAN be idiots. But I guess the Eagles organization is different. 9-6-1 and 8-8 is pretty damn awesome. Glad they get paid the big bucks.
Look, I admit I am emotional about the loss of Dawkins. I was also emotional about the loss of Trotter and Douglas. However, in both of those cases I understood it from a football sense. They key is that those were not just good business decisions they were good football decisions. The bottom line is that we cheer on this team because they represent our city not because they make good financial decisions. If it was just the business side of this that had us hooked I’d be a bigger fan of Google and Microsoft than I would be of my Philadelphia Eagles. I’d be enjoying the failures of Wachovia rather than the failures of the Dallas Cowpies. You morons, this is football! Emotion is a huge part of the game and the fans would not be paying a cent if was not for their emotions.
So the bottom line is that regardless of the business side of this, I think it was a mistake as a football decision. Telling me that Demps is an upgrade over Dawk for this season is like telling me Kolb is an upgrade over McNabb. (I know that will get some of you in a fury) Demps is an unknown. Two years from now, maybe. But to say he will be an upgrade this year is an impossible commitment. Yes, Dawkins has lost a step but he is a potential Hall of Famer. When Jerry Rice lost a step he was still pretty damn good. And to say Springs is two years youngers which makes it a huge difference is deplorable. Springs was marginal in his prime. Dawkins is one of the best safeties ever. Finally, he did make the Pro Bowl last year but not the year before. So he is not as automatic as say a Ray Lewis. I agree that the Pro Bowl does not mean everything but in his case, he could not have played horribly and been nominated. And for those of you who think he did, go back and watch the Steelers game and both Giants wins.
So here is my final cry. Dawkins gave this team so much from a leadership standpoint, both on the field and off, that cannot be measured by statistics. They will lose that and there will be a void. He is also still a good player in the right situation. Losing him without having someone ready to replace him is also a downgrade no matter how you look at it. So the Eagles made a business decision but they hurt the team to do so. If they truly were only an upgrade or two away from a championship as we all like to think, why hurt the team? This was purely a business decision and not a football decision. This front office has no loyalty to their paying customers. And for some reason, many of you are living by the same creed. You say it was a great football decision. Your logic? The front office knows what they are doing. Well, us overly emotional idiot fans have one thing in common with the Eagles front office. We have put together just as many Lombardi Trophy winning teams as they have.
While I am not one of those fans who is going to suddenly become a Broncos fan I am really starting to question why I put so much heart into this “business.” This team does not really represent our city. This team is a business that has a sole purpose of increasing profits just like any other business. While that, in itself, is not bad, it makes me wonder why we put any emotion into it ourselves.
TLDNR
"I need to do a better job of putting players in the right position to perennially come up short of expectations"
Sorry
I’ll make it into a coloring book for you next time.
LOL, Can you include a pop up book as well
Just playing bro, we all posted long ones before.
City of Champions!
I have been harboring my feelings on this topic for days. I finally let it loose. Hey at least I got it out even if everyone takes one look and moves on. I am going to miss the guy and even taking my emotions out of it, I don’t think it was a good decision. That is the bottom line.
I understand where you are coming from. I definately agree that Dawkins was a leader.
But imagine if we gave him what he wanted (2 or 3 year commitment.). He gets cut during that contract. I really do believe that the Eagles wanted him back, but didn’t want to embarass Dawkins by having to cut him. They really had a hard decision to make.
Either face the fans now, and let him walk, or give him what he wants and release him next year. You see, I don’t think this was a business decision, they have plenty of cash. They just avoided a greater fan fall out next year. I hard as it is to see him in green, it was the right decision.
I hope he returns as a coach in a few years. He is definately a part of what the Eagles fan love in a player. Passion.
City of Champions!
I’m just busting your balls Dawk …
"I need to do a better job of putting players in the right position to perennially come up short of expectations"
Puke
Yeah, I guess I needed to vomit that crap out. I can see the point about cutting him. I guess I hoped if they truly had a good relationship like I thought they had that they could sit down and he would agree to retire next year or the year after, depending on his play next year.
I think ...
what the Eagles have realized is … that a true competitor will never want to retire. Look at Michael Jordan, look at Brett Favre, et al.
It is so hard to leave the sport you love shit I would never want to retire either. I have to imagine they wanted him back but did what was best for both of them.
"I need to do a better job of putting players in the right position to perennially come up short of expectations"
Honestly, how does this make any sense?
So he’s getting old, he lost a step, he doesn’t get many picks anymore……
he was STILL up there in the league in tackles, passes defensed (for safeties), sacks, forced fumbles, i could go on for ever baby.
So now we’re entertaining signing Shawn Springs (who WILL NOT come cheap), a 34 year old corner and thrust him into the role of FS?? He’s missed more games than LITO over the last 3 years.
And besides, how much could the defense could have really suffered with that gimpy goat Dawkins back there patrolling center field, finishing 3RD BEST IN THE LEAGUE AND ALL
Dawkins took a home town discount from us for years. He is very much NOT trotter, douglas, or Ike fucking Reese. He’s been here the whole time and has given us more than any front office could ask from a player. He deserved a fair contract. Even if their grand scheme was to start Demps next year, he deserved a fair contract.
-WHAT else are we doing with our 45 million dollars? It’s not like you get bonus points for not using your cap money. He was a top 3 player on the defense last year, how could this honestly be justified as a football decision?
It seems to me this is a case of ridiculous arrogance of the Eagles front office. They gave him a shit 1 year offer, told him if you don’t like it look elsewhere and he didn’t. The Broncos came TO HIM. Was he supposed to do??
Now we can rest assured going into next season with an old, oft-injured cornerback as our starting Free Safety, instead of the only face of the franchise that is universally adored. Smart football decision. He was an exception to the rule, and I bet we find out in 6 months.
As much as I am pissed and sadden about the whole situation regarding Dawkins, I really hope that this is the last time we have a discussion about this. Really, it’s not doing us any good just sitting here talking about what could have been done or should have been done. My take on the whole issue is that the negotiations came down to a matter of respect more than anything. Had the front office dealt with the situation delicately and with more respect, I think Dawkins would still be wearing that green jersey. This is where I think the front office really blew it: not in the offer they made but in the way they approached and handled the situation. That is not a way to treat a legend who has taken a hometown discount for many years and gave it his all to the organization.
Now, while I wished Dawkins could have retired as an Eagle, it was clear that he had lost a step last year and struggled until the system was adjusted to compensate for this. I still believe Dawkins has one or two good years left in the tank in OUR system. Furthermore, he is a tremendous leader out there on the field and a player who can pick up the team if needed to. That is why I believed that Dawkins would have been re-signed (considering all the money that we have). But of course, I’m sure everyone is glad that the FO didn’t match Denver’s ridiculous contract. It was a smart business move and possibly a smart football decision depending on what happens with the rest of the FA and/or the draft.
Whatever may have happened, the bottom line is, Dawk is no longer a Philadelphia Eagle. Sitting here and bitching about what we should have done is not going to bring him back. He made the decision to get his last pay day before retirement and the Eagles made the decision to move on without him. We need to do the same and move on. We have a very promising group of young players on defense (albeit not perfect). We should be talking about the front office should do to improve this defense because really, complaining isn’t going to change anything.
Have you read any of the theories ...
… that the front office WAS being respectful by letting him leave in free agency rather than cutting him or benching him when he can’t play anymore?
It is possible but...
It does not make the team any better this year.
Yeah I understand that. Of course it’s better to let him walk then to cut him a few years down the line. But I believe Dawkins has two more productive years as a safety/linebacker hybrid specifically in our own system with JJ. Obviously the front office and many other people don’t think he’ll be able to sustain a high level of play for much longer.
Also, Dawkins could have helped tremendously with the development of Demps. I’ve read reports that the front office does not feel that Demps is ready yet. Ultimately, if the FO somehow does not address the need and depth at safety position via FA or draft, then I believe it was a mistake in that they even let Dawk hit free agency. The deal should have been done long before the FA began.
Three retorts
First of all, this topic is as likely to die as a McNabb conspiracy theory. And if the Eagles falter at any point next year, this topic will be raised again. If you don’t like the fact that people are not over it yet, choose a different topic to read and respond to.
Second, based on our cap situation, his contract was not that ridiculous. 9 million over two years with 7.5 guaranteed is essentially what the Broncos paid. This is not Albert Haynesworth money. Hell, this is not even close to Stacy Andrews money. Worst case, we are shelling out 4.5 mil for two seasons. You think that is ridiculous? If so, look at how much we are paying our nickel corner.
Finally, what is there to talk about from an improvement standpoint? Who is out there at this point that will make this team better? You are going to replace Dawkins with Shawn Springs and be happy? Or maybe the prospect of a new fullback gets you excited. The one that we have not even invited for a visit at this point. Trades? Well we traded Lito for a 5th round pick (this season). Woo-hoo! Lots of great things to talk about so why fret over the loss of Dawkins?
Three retorts to your retorts
1. True, it’s not likely to die. We all loved watching Dawkins play. Why should those of us who are looking at this rationally instead of emotionally (which you admit being) have to post in another thread. We care just the same. We’re just sifting through some of the emotion and looking forward.
Also, it would help if there were other threads to post on :)
2. Someone over the weekend made the point that having money to spend is not a reason to spend it.
Would you pay $9 for a $3 big mac just because you had $40 in your pocket? Would you buy a $3,000 used car for $9,000 because you had $40,000 in the bank? I realize that’s a simplified example, but when it comes to money management, it’s not a bad idea to take emotion out of it and pay what you think something is worth. You do this every day, it just feels different because your favorite football player isn’t involved.
3. 11 draft picks. $40 mil or whatever in cap room. The offseason isn’t a week old. I’m not saying we’ve got a lot to talk about right now, but by panicking at this point, you’re saying the game is over midway through the first quarter.
The Eagles have always paid for FUTURE production ...
… in their minds, so what he’s done to this point matters little to them.
It’s tough to stomach, no doubt, but I think the Eagles — as has been said several times here — would rather give up on a guy a year too early than too late.
I thought Dawkins might be one of the exceptions to the rule, to be quite honest with you, but as far as respect is concerned, they re-signed him against their m.o. for 3 years once already, and they made him an offer to come back.
I think Dawk has to take his fair share of the blame for balking at the offer … maybe I would have gotten insulted and left too … I just don’t think it’s accurate to say the front office made no attempt/completely botched this, etc.
I think everyone here (almost) agrees we wanted Dawk back more for the man he is than the player he’s going to be over the next two seasons.
Your retorts be damned, mine are better.
1. Putting emotions aside, I feel this was not a good move and that adds even more emotion if that makes sense. I am not just emotional about seeing Dawk go when I never saw this happening. I am also emotional that I think it hurts the team. Believe it or not, I look at the team side of it rationally and I think letting him go for 4 millon was a big mistake. So then I get even more emotional that the front office f’d up in two ways.
2. If I was starving and at a place where my options were a $9 Big Mac or nothing and I also happened to be flush with $20s in my pocket, I’d by that Big Mac in a heartbeat. Have you ever paid for a coke at a movie to help make your movie experience more enjoyable? Yet, you pay a hell of a lot for that coke, right? Same idea.
3. Not sure if you are referring to me on this. I am not panicking by any means. I am just saying there is not much to talk about OTHER than this issue. And I feel the FO DID let us, the fans, down. Not just from a fan favorite standpoint but from a degradation to their product standpoint. The way things stand today, this team is worse than it was when the season ended. And my point about not talking about possibilities is that there really are none left outside of the draft. And how many rookies make huge impacts in their rookie year? FA is pretty bland this year so I am just saying there is not much to be excited about.
Yours might be better, but I wouldn't overpay for them ...
Well, there’s not a whole lot to disagree with when you boil your original post down to that one above. However, given the lack of other topics to discuss … :)
1. I’m not sure it would be a good move to replace Dawkins with Demps and call it a day. But these things don’t happen on paper, or in a vacuum … Money is a factor. Length of contract is a factor. Age is a factor. Hurt feelings are a factor. Arguing whether or not it was a good football move is kind of silly at this point, because a) we don’t really know who will step in for Dawkins at FS (and notice I was careful not to use the word “replace,” as dude is irreplaceable), and b) we don’t know if he will be any good in that role.
What if Demps can play? What if he (or whoever we sign & end up starting there) is superb in coverage, but not quite as fierce a hitter? Would you take that? Would you say the Birds can’t be good on defense? You think Jim Johnson — and I hope the guy gets better and is able to coach this year — can’t play to those strengths?
They cut Trotter because he was a liability in coverage and they weren’t going to ask him to be a part-time player. Dawkins was potentially facing the same future.
2. Okay, we can probably mince these money examples for weeks. I could argue that the Eagles are not starving. The movie theather thing almost makes sense … but the entire movie theater is an inflated market, so if $6 is the going rate for a coke, you don’t pay $18 for it.
3. I was speaking generally about the panic, and I agree there is not much else to talk about. So I humor you.
You are well within your rights to be emotional about seeing one of your favorite players leave your favorite team. You are free to be of the opinion that we were let down on this one.
The front office has a track record on this though, and it is nearly flawless. Over time, I’ve come to balance my frustration with them not re-signing guys I like with the fact that none has ever really gone on to star elsewhere and make me regret the FO’s decision.
As far as rookies making huge impacts, I agree there are few … But having 11 draft picks actually makes it more likely that we won’t use them all; we can make a trade, FA is not necessarily over. We are not locked in to starting a rookie at FS.
Eagles aren't starving for a championship?
Believe it or not, my emotions about Dawkins are no longer part of this equation. I’ll make this my last argument on this topic, at least with you, as I can see you will support Joe Banner to the end. In your defense, I am not backing down either so obviously neither one of us is likely to be swayed by our incredibly smart arguments.
You have to take my comments in context. My first post on this blog was that you guys are all right, Eagles FO has never made a mistake which is why they have won “100’s of championships.” It was not a Banner vs. Dawkins argument. They do make mistakes. Every front office makes mistakes. Do they make as many as the Redskins, Browns, 49ers, or even the Cardinals? Not recently. They have not won the big one either like so many other teams have during their run. So I could argue they have not made as many good decisions as the Colts, Patriots, VaGiants, Steelers, etc, etc. My point there was not to say who was right, Dawkins or Banner. It was to say that everyone who is taking a side with the Eagles FO is saying they are doing so because they do not make mistakes, period.
D3Keith, I don’t post a lot so you may not have seen or remember my past posts. I am not a beat up the Eagles mgmt guy. Never have. I have always been supportive of their moves and found the good football or business logic in what they have done. I can tell you with 100% certaintly that I say this objectively. I don’t see how this move improves the team for next season and I am being equally objective when I say it will hurt the team. I also don’t think 4.5 for 2 years is too much to pay to keep yourself from getting worse and potentially taking a step backwards. I think we’d all agree with that philosophy. The Eagles FO would agree with that philosophy which is why they paid so much to Hanson and Andrews. So this truly comes down to one thing for me. Taking “Brian Fing Dawkins” out of the equation and just looking at the player. I feel this was a bad move and a mistake. They may have a good track record here but I think they blew it on this one.
So, I am starting to feel that this FO is happy to be competitive and hope the chips all fall in place one year. Not denying they want to win it all by any means. And we all know they are not willing to mortgage their future for the present. However, at this stage we have to say that philosophy may not be working. Even Banner said himself that they have to look at some things and make some changes because they just are not getting it done. Do I want to start paying ALL veterans huge contracts? No. Do I want us to pay 100 million for Albert Haynesworth? No. But I think you sometimes have to make exceptions to policies when there are extenuating circumstances. Dawkins, the player for 2008, was one of those.
Like most Eagles fans, a modicum of success is not what I have been looking for. I want a championship. If they truly were close last season, why not try to improve or at least avoid taking a step backward at any position? Now, maybe they did not think the team was as close. Maybe they see 9-6-1 and not 7 points away from the SB. If that is the case and they are trying to some form of youth movement, then you might as well trade McNabb as well.
I meant to post this earlier ...
If this is somebody’s point:
Banner is a genius and has 100’s of championships
We can also say “How many championships has Brian Dawkins won?”
That’s dangerous territory there, to define a man’s contributions solely by the number of championships he’s won. Just because Judd Bucheler has three rings doesn’t mean he can hold Charles Barkley or Karl Malone’s jock.
all about the money - the almighty dollar wins again
selfish- like dawkins doesnt have money playing what 13 years what the F ever
When I look at this team, I still don't feel as though we are very far away, we still have to work hard and do the things we are capable of, but we do have the chance to get back and come back strong." -Brian Westbrook-
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
