- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
Don't talk to me like a jackass. With the way the league is heading these days, you DO basically need three starters. Nickel corners see the field more now than ever. On many teams, they are on the field for over half of their defensive snaps. It is a common saying these days, in fact, that you do need three starting corners. Why do you think the Giants keep drafting them in the first round?
The move makes their team worse in the immediate future. He's been arguably the most consistent cornerback in the league for the better portion of a decade now, and plenty of metric sites regularly use him as a textbook example of the ideal corner. For a team with immediate Super Bowl aspirations, to remove possibly your best defensive player with only a 7th rounder as compensation sets you back in your goal, especially when Richard Seymour can net you a 1st round pick. The Eagles are a now team. Their cap concerns are negligible compared to a lot of teams, both for this year and next year, and then the salary cap rises anyway. They would have had like $10M this year still without trading Samuel. Asomugha is exactly 5 months younger than Samuel, by the way. He also gave up 2 touchdowns last year while allowing 4.4 YPP (3rd in the league), a 67% success rate (3rd) 2 YAC (2nd), etc. Perhaps you should utilize statistics instead of gut feelings like this: "The guy gave up touchdowns non stop. Dude got burned CONSTANTLY. His gambles to make a play on the ball failed more often than not and he couldn't tackle to save his life."
As I said earlier, it is a bullheaded move that showcases a stubborn grip on the new philosophy. Instead of accommodating one of their best players, using him as a nickel where he can play zone more, they decided to stick to the guns that they bought last year that got them to a .500 record. Of course, they know nothing about acquiring talent because they're talented and worrying about how to accommodate after the fact...there certainly aren't half a dozen very recent examples one could cite on their active roster.
The move makes their team worse in the immediate future. He's been arguably the most consistent cornerback in the league for the better portion of a decade now, and plenty of metric sites regularly use him as a textbook example of the ideal corner. For a team with immediate Super Bowl aspirations, to remove possibly your best defensive player with only a 7th rounder as compensation sets you back in your goal, especially when Richard Seymour can net you a 1st round pick. The Eagles are a now team. Their cap concerns are negligible compared to a lot of teams, both for this year and next year, and then the salary cap rises anyway. They would have had like $10M this year still without trading Samuel. Asomugha is exactly 5 months younger than Samuel, by the way. He also gave up 2 touchdowns last year while allowing 4.4 YPP (3rd in the league), a 67% success rate (3rd) 2 YAC (2nd), etc. Perhaps you should utilize statistics instead of gut feelings like this: "The guy gave up touchdowns non stop. Dude got burned CONSTANTLY. His gambles to make a play on the ball failed more often than not and he couldn't tackle to save his life."
As I said earlier, it is a bullheaded move that showcases a stubborn grip on the new philosophy. Instead of accommodating one of their best players, using him as a nickel where he can play zone more, they decided to stick to the guns that they bought last year that got them to a .500 record. Of course, they know nothing about acquiring talent because they're talented and worrying about how to accommodate after the fact...there certainly aren't half a dozen very recent examples one could cite on their active roster.
