dhamz

Perhaps I didn't articulate it well enough:

All QBs are either very expensive or they probably stink. It is like that all over the league. Guys who have proven between nothing and almost nothing cost almost as much as Eli got in guarenteed $. Matthew Stafford reportedly got more guarenteed. If you don't have a QB and don't have a high pick, you might have to pay similar $ for an unproven guy and throw draft picks in as well. The Giants have won 22 games and 4 playoff games including a Super Bowl the last 2 years with Eli at QB. When you have a QB you can say that about, you are going to pay him. The replacement risk far outweighs any potential savings.

The NFC East is not celebrating. The Giants didn't cripple themselves with this deal. It simply isn't that much more than other teams are paying their QBs. None of the other teams in that division are sitting there with a great QB at low $. Two of them have highly paid QBs who compare much more closely to Eli than to the elite Brady/Peyton level or the lowly Tavaris Jackson level. The other team tried very hard all offseason to pay big in $ and picks to acquire less proven guys than Eli and failed. They are stuck with a cheaper QB who they didn't want.

PatsFanSince74

The only franchises this decade that can better be described as "winning franchises" with a "solid QB whose strengths and weakness have established him..." than can the Eagles with McNabb are the Colts with Peyton, the Pats with Tommy and the Steelers with Big Ben. Yes, the Giants won the SB and Eli played a very good game that day, but that's a long way from saying that Eli has proven he can sustain the Giants as a winning team. My money says that he won't, and I'll stick to that until proven wrong over time.

I'm not a Donovan McNabb apologist, but over a 10 year career, he's taken his team to five NFCCG's and one SB and put up a Pass Rating that is 10 points higher than Eli's. As for Romo, he's an idiot, but his Pass Rating is 20 points higher than Eli's and his W/L record as a starter is 27--12 (.692) vs. Eli's 42--29 (.592). As for the Redskins, well few teams have mismanaged the cap and their personnel as badly as they have, but it's not limited to the QB slot.

Paying Eli, who is no better than and may be worse than both McNabb and Romo, this kind of money is likely, over time to tilt the competitive balance against the Giants in the Division. That's my only point. Check back with me in a few seasons, when I'll be proven either right or wrong.

__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.

Danny

That's an ugly contract.

PatsFanSince74

I'll grant you that the "NFC East is not celebrating," but I also think that Eli's contract is to the benefit of the Eagles and Cowboys (and to the Redskins if Dan Snyder can resist the urge to sign every overpriced Free Agent that comes along, but that's another subject). I know that he won the SB, but I really think that this contract will work against the Giants. This is Brady or Peyton money for a guy who just isn't in their class. That has to hurt over time. It's like the Knicks paying Jordan money to Ewing...it was more "thanks for the memories" than "build for the future."

__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.

PatsFanSince74

Hmmm...let me follow that logic. Matt, one good season and $11 million per year. Eli, five "OK or Good" seasons (look at his stats) and one ring and $14 million per year.

So, if Eli "deserves" $14 million, what does Tommy "deserve" with seven outstanding seasons, four SB's and three rings? $42 per year?

My point is simply that you just can't make the Matt argument to justify Eli's salary (even if I do happen to think that Brady might be worth that kind of money in a perfect world). Eli is overpaid by any reasonable measure.

__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.

patchick

I believe that too, but NOT paying him would have hurt them too, more immediately and certainly. If you were the Giants, would you really be prepared to let Eli walk?

PatsFanSince74

that's exactly the point I made in my email this morning to one of the reporters at the Daily News here, with whom I correspond once in a while; I argued that Eli held the Giants up. i'm going to be interested on the take in the NY press tomorrow.

the tabloids especially were more "neutral" than anything else on Eli before Teflon Helmet Day, so his support, while broad now, is an inch deep. If they don't win the division and get past the Wild Card round this season, the grumbling will begin again, now with a vengeance because of the contract.

To answer your question, they had no choice, but choosing the better of two bad options (overpay him or lose him) is still a bad choice and will limit the team's options in the out years.

__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.

Double G

One Super Bowl win due in large part to the greatest catch in Super Bowl history (probably NFL history)= the highest paid player in the game.

What a world we live in, honest to Christ.

If this goober is worth that much dough, I can only imagine what TFB is going to get.........................

__________________
"We don't throw at .260 hitters." Tek to Pay-Fraud before he smacked him across the face.

PatsFanSince74

the greatest catch in SB history? nah. the luckiest catch, for sure, but Lynn Swann, SB X, 1976 is still the greatest catch in SB history. the greatest catch in post season history, IMO, is a tie between "The Catch" and the "Immaculate Reception."

__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.

patfanken

RIGHT ON THE MONEY!!!! - I actually think Brady understands the first rule of capology. That for every dollar he gets, its one less dollar for everyone around him. At if he played for the "bargain basement price of $10MM/yr, its not like we'd have to throw a testimonial for him.

When your team is top heavy with big contracts, then its doomed to failure. All these reporters who keep telling us to Pay this guy or PAY that guy are SOOOOOO short sighted. Think about it. Everyone has told us that we should have paid Assante, Well if we had who else wouldn't be here now. Remember we were right up against the cap when FA started. Think Vrabel. There are those who said we should have kept him, and we could have, but someone ELSE wouldn't be here. This isn't a zero sum deal. For every action there is a reaction, NONE of this happens in a vaccuum.

And this is MORE true in football, where even the best players, like Tom Brady, have less of an INDIVIDUAL impact than any other team sport. Just look at last year. Brady goes and out and a no name leads the team to 11 wins, and the focus of most of those 5 losses came from the DEFENSIVE side....and Brady wouldn't have been much help chasing down WRs.

The sorry fact is that at the top end of the pay scale, its ALL ABOUT how big your dick is. They all have more money the day they sign these contracts than they'll EVER need. Hell, Brady could play for nothing and never run out of money. Hell Brady could give away all the money he currently has and be a millionaire off the INTEREST from what his wife makes. .

I doubt it would ever happen, but I'd love to see Brady take stand and grab a "mere" 10% bite out of 100MM+ salary cap, to make sure he is surrounded by enough players to be competitive year in and year out.

PFS74 has it right. Mannings contract....EVEN IF HE DESERVED IT....will hurt the Giants in the long run.