- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 64,173
- Liked Posts:
- 40,931
I didnt say it changes the value of of the contract. I am saying it changes the AAV from a cap perspective. If I sign for 3 years and 66m that is an AAV of 22m and over the life of the contract the AAV will average 22m no matter how you allocate the money. However if I add 2 void years then the 66m gets allocated over 5 years not 3 years so the actual AAV for cap purposes is actually 13.2m.
The Eagles have allocated around 35m, 35m, and 11m of Mailata, Dickerson and Johnson contracts to void years. So that is 81m of cap space that they are saving relative to the Bears during the non-void years. If the contracts are 5 non void years then that is an average of 16.2m a year more the Eagles will have to spend during those first 5 years. So again that allows the Eagles to spend more from a cap persepctive during that period relative to the Bears who dont use void years.
Of course the flip side is the Eagles will be spending 81m in cap space during void years where the player isnt on the roster but they are gambling that the cap will be higher those years and that without a lot of cap dollars already allocated to those years they can build a team around that 81m in dead cap.
As to your other point I already addressed it. I said their younger options at T have underperformed so my point was even if they do draft a RT to eventually replace Taylor I doubt they want that RT plus unproven Morris and Suamataia at tackle given they are perennial contenders. So I expect them to try and find a vet T to secure one of the T spots unless Morris or Suamataia take a huge step.
Last edited:
