ESPN Insider is sooo worth it

by JasonB on Mar 6, 2008 4:46 PM EST in News

So over at "The world leader" you can pay $39.95 a year to read articles on their website by being an "ESPN Insider." Of course, the majority of the news in these articles is discussed on the actual channel which you probably already have... but at least it's their content. What I saw today blew my mind.

In their "Rumor Central" section you can find this headline, "Eagles eyeing Fitzgerald"

But oh no! You have to be an ESPN Insider to view it! Luckily... I happen to know an Insider.

Thursday, March 6
Eagles eyeing Fitzgerald
Larry Fitzgerald | Cardinals
After losing out on free agents Randy Moss and Javon Walker, the Eagles will turn to Cardinals wideout Larry Fitzgerald, The (Wilmington, Del.) News Journal reported.
According to reports, despite the pursuit of Fitzgerald, the two-time Pro Bowler may be closer to staying in Arizona than exploring free agency. Roy Williams and Torry Holt are likely candidates if the Eagles don't land Fitzgerald.

You read it correctly. ESPN is asking you to pay for content they've recycled from other news sources that give it away for FREE! Here is the link to the FREE article on The News Journal

Tsk Tsk...

0 recs | Comment 17 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

ummm

I give no worth to this story because Fitz wouldn't be "exploring free agency," he would however probably get put in a trade situation. And it's actually not his call. It's the organizations call if they want to trade him or not. Given that his absurd contract will basically force them to trade him if they can't resturcture, it is still their call. Even if they can't restructure, they COULD keep him, altough it would severely screw up their ability to field a competitive team...

by foos05 on Mar 7, 2008 9:10 AM EST 0 recs

Not so sure...

Look, I love Fitzgerald. I love his talent, I love the way he carries himself, and I would go crazy (in a good way) if he somehow became an Eagle.

But it's not happening now. The Cardinals have no reason to let him go anymore. They are under the cap. There are no significant free agents they are after. They can afford to sign draft picks.

I think there really might have been a window to pick up Fitzgerald. When free agency started and the Cardinals were known to want Faneca and were trying to re-sign Pace. But both of those guys are gone. So now they're going to keep Fitzgerald one way or another.

Worst case scenario for them, now -- they pay Fitzgerald the ~$15 million this season without a restructure. Next season they can try and trade him again (though their position is weaker), try and restructure (again), or just cut him.

But I just don't see them dumping him now. It doesn't make any sense.

http://www.sporsdork.com

by BFH on Mar 7, 2008 9:21 AM EST up 0 recs

outcome

i'm not disputing what the article says the outcome will be, just the article itself... i mean i would assume whoever wrote it would know the difference between free agency and trading... also it mentions Holt on our list... i realize he's probably not too thrilled with St. Louis considering they let Bruce go, and that's a sign that they're probably going to start shipping the veterans out, but he's 31. Given, it doesn't mention that we'd shop Sheppard for him, altough I believe I've heard the Rams were interested in him. It just seems like an odd fit, unless they were shipping us picks as well... and again, how much does he have left in the tank?

by foos05 on Mar 7, 2008 9:30 AM EST up 0 recs

they still need help on defence

and perticularly at the corner possition. while they can draft a corner they lost pace and need to replace him too so they still migh go after lito(as mych as it pains me to see him go) so they can draft pace's replacement.

I personaly think the cardnals and the eagles pretty much have an agreement to trade they are just arguing over what picks and how many go to AZ

by NickPampani on Mar 7, 2008 9:31 AM EST up 0 recs

st. louis

i realize they need a CB, and it would be a great trade for them... i'm just saying that i dont' know if i want a 31 year old WR for a 26 year old corner

by foos05 on Mar 7, 2008 9:33 AM EST up 0 recs

plus

a team would only let a player explore free agency if they can't get anything for that player. in fitz's case, while is contract is absurd, the eagles havw still made a trade offer for him. yes arizon will take a penalty hit for trading him but they will get atleast one high pick and lito for an outrageously low price.

by NickPampani on Mar 7, 2008 9:24 AM EST up 0 recs

I think...

Fitz wants to come to Philly and he and his agent are "turning the screws" on Arizona to force a trade out of there. I think if Arizona will allow a trade the eagles, or somebody else, will pony up the trade fodder. If he wanted to stay, and wanted to play next year for the cardinals, and I mean REALLY wanted to play, he'd make a concession in terms of guaranteed money and would restructure his deal in a more cap friendly manner. There are other ways to get the money your after and his agent and he are not willing to bend. This only signals that he wants out, like Ocho Cinco, but unlike Ocho he currently has leverage and has the ability to screw the team this year.

If they don't dump him, would this affect their draft choices or just the free agency market?

by thwalls on Mar 7, 2008 11:06 AM EST 0 recs

Kinda both

It's going to mean they'll have to cut guys before they sign anymore free agents. It also means that more draft picks are going to have to make the team and they may need to jettison some veterans making decent money even if they don't sign anyone new.

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

by JasonB on Mar 7, 2008 11:10 AM EST up 0 recs

Yeah

They are out of the running on any big-name free agents while that contract is on the books. But, as I said, there really isn't much left in that department anyway.

They made a few moves to get into better position -- they got Bertrand Berry to take a pay cut ($3 mil), they cut Terrance Holt and a couple of other guys as well.

Those moves allowed them to make one significant move -- signing Travis Laboy to a moderate deal. But the Fitzgerald contract still kept them from even making an attempt at Faneca or Pace.

They are still under the cap and could sign their draft picks. They would actually be a lot worse off if they pulled their usual 5-11 season -- the rookie deal their #1 would need would be a lot more expensive.

http://www.sporsdork.com

by BFH on Mar 7, 2008 11:24 AM EST up 0 recs

My worry is

that they've already run out of free agents. There's not really many more if any significant names out there. If that's the case, why not just hold onto Fitzgerald?

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

by JasonB on Mar 7, 2008 11:36 AM EST up 0 recs

Yep

Exactly my point.

http://www.sporsdork.com

by BFH on Mar 7, 2008 11:40 AM EST up 0 recs

because they still need a corner

its not about free agency its about filling needs. they don't need 2 pro bowl recivers. they do need a corner, and there was only one out there and they didn't have the money for him anyway. they will trade him not so they could go out and sign free agents but to fill needs. so they will fill the corner need and with the extra pick they will atack other needs with their new cap room. or even trade the picks for a tackel.

by NickPampani on Mar 7, 2008 11:43 AM EST up 0 recs

by the way

I realize that it might sound like I want to trade lito but I don't. I just came to grips sadly that he is most likely going to be delt and I would rather see him go for fitz then anyone else

by NickPampani on Mar 7, 2008 11:47 AM EST up 0 recs

The Cards

Don't desperately need a corner they do have Rod Hood and Antrel Rolle (although he may have moved to safety due to injuries I can't remember) those two guys are good corners. Trading Lito to the Cards is not the only option. To be honest the Cards would benefit more from gaining Draft picks or an OL that can better run block. They are still trying to rebuild and the reason they want to keep 2 pro bowl receivers is because Larry is 24 and Boldin is 27 but had some injuries last year.

by Whodie126 on Mar 7, 2008 12:26 PM EST up 0 recs

a nice sports rumor site

i caught this very article on the nfl rumors page on prosportsdaily.com.

check that site out. it has tons of local articles well organized and fun to read during these times of speculation.

http://poorsportsblog.blogspot.com/

by PoorSports on Mar 7, 2008 11:15 AM EST 0 recs

hahahah

link on their rumor section. love eagles fans

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Fitzgerald

it appears we've already decided the future

by crickles on Mar 7, 2008 8:05 PM EST up 0 recs

Frustrations growing?

thats the title put next to Larry Fitzgerald's name on nfl.coms fee agency news page. this was pulled from an article found on AzCenral.com [http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/articles/0307cards0307.html]

on nfl.com they had this to say:
Rumblings of frustration are growing within the Cardinals organization over the restructuring of Fitzgerald's contract, The Arizona Republic reports. While the restructuring of a new contract is no closer to fruition than it was a month ago, other teams are making efforts to trade for the Pro Bowl receiver, including a discussion between the Cardinals and Eagles.

after actually reading the article i don't know how good it is. Arizona insists Fitz will play for them this year and that they do not have a need for lito.

by NickPampani on Mar 7, 2008 4:55 PM EST 0 recs