Mike Patterson To Be Extended?

[PhillyPhreak54]

And his height has what to do with it?

Him being 5'11 actually helps him. He's fast off the ball and he is able to use that lack of height to his advantage.

This is classic Eagles FO. It is a deal that will be cheap in comparison to market value when he would have been a UFA.

If he sucks he can be cut most likely without it hurting the cap. That's how Banner does it.

[Eaglez]

I'm not torn up by this deal, but I'm not estatic about it either.  It probably could have waited a year, but I assume it was done to get money under this year's cap instead of next year.  Patt gets a hell of a lot of guarenteed money, but I bet it's structured in such a way that it can be terminated early if necessary without much of a hit.

Guarantees are the only compensation the player is entitled to receive. If he is cut, they just accelerate to the year he is cut. It's not like you can 'lessen' the blow at all unless the Eagles structured a lot of the guarantees to come into play this year. Otherwise, he'll be an extremely costly cut if he craps it up in a couple of years.

Patterson is a good DT, but he definitely needs a compliment. My fear is that he doesn't occupy enough attention in the middle and is exploited in the run game. He's great on passing down, but in the run I think he needs to improve more.

[ice grillin you]

If he sucks he can be cut most likely without it hurting the cap. That's how Banner does it.

shtein if it thats easy why doesnt he do it every year with with a bunch of top notch free agents who have actually accomplished something in their nfl careers


i wonder what happens too if bunkley has a decent year next season...does he then go to the FO and ask for pattersons contract or even better

[Father Demon]

I'm not torn up by this deal, but I'm not ecstatic about it either.  It probably could have waited a year, but I assume it was done to get money under this year's cap instead of next year.  Patt gets a hell of a lot of guaranteed money, but I bet it's structured in such a way that it can be terminated early if necessary without much of a hit.

Guarantees are the only compensation the player is entitled to receive. If he is cut, they just accelerate to the year he is cut. It's not like you can 'lessen' the blow at all unless the Eagles structured a lot of the guarantees to come into play this year. Otherwise, he'll be an extremely costly cut if he craps it up in a couple of years.

Patterson is a good DT, but he definitely needs a compliment. My fear is that he doesn't occupy enough attention in the middle and is exploited in the run game. He's great on passing down, but in the run I think he needs to improve more.

That's what I meant, even if I didn't say it.  The remaining ~$25M (with full bonuses and such) would be cut along with him if they decide to not honor the entire contract.  I would guess, although I don't know at all, that a pretty good portion of the guaranteed money is within the first three years of the deal, if not the first two years.

[PhillyPhreak54]

If he sucks he can be cut most likely without it hurting the cap. That's how Banner does it.

shtein if it thats easy why doesnt he do it every year with with a bunch of top notch free agents who have actually accomplished something in their nfl careers


i wonder what happens too if bunkley has a decent year next season...does he then go to the FO and ask for pattersons contract or even better

Well, because once a guy hits that FA market he's got the $ in his eyes. They played out their "paltry" rookie deals and are looking for a big payday. But he still structures those deals smartly (TO, Kearse, Howard, etc) where most of the hit are up front so later on down the life of the deal if they suck, get hurt or become psychotic they can cut ties relatively easy.

Here's the breakdown of the deal;

PATTERSON GETS PAID

The Eagles have signed defensive tackle Mike Patterson to a long-term extension, locking up the team's 2005 first-round draft choice through 2016 via a seven year extension that doesn't even begin to apply until 2010.

Under the contract, Patterson gets $4.5 million to sign and a $4.5 million roster bonus in 2007.  The salaries beginning in 2010 are $1.1 million, $1.4 million, $2.1 million, $2.9 million, $3.65 million, $4.9 million, and $6.25 million.

But since the only real guarantee is the $4.5 million signing bonus, and since that money prorates at $900,000 per year starting this year, there will be no cap acceleration if he is cut in 2010 or thereafter.

From 2010 and onward, then, the contract is a series of one-year deals -- and very reasonable salaries if Patterson becomes a stud.  And if he becomes a stud, he'll surely claim that he has outperformed his deal.

Before Patterson or his agents succumb to that temptation, they need to keep in mind the $9 million in bonuses that Patterson has received in exchange for voluntarily tying himself down for the next decade.

So they'll take half of the guaranteed hit in 2007 when he is still young. That roster bonus will count all in one shot next year. The remaining 4.5 is then prorated so it is a smaller cap number and thus easy to cut ties. And as the breakdown points out - if he is cut past 2010 then there is no hit.

This is a good deal. It keeps him here on the cheap and also protects the team.

[ice grillin you]

while the deal may be good and i dont even think its anything special....it was not needed and the guaranteed money given to him in the next few years could have been much better used in the free agent market especially the direction this team is going they have to make a big splash in FA this year and probably next....

or save the money for someone like bunkley justice herremans cole brown or any other players who may already be or one day turn into true studs...patterson simply was not deserving of this contract at this time...in the teams defense they did the same thing with brown and lito and it worked out tho they showed much more potential for greatness than has patterson...i think it would have been better to let patterson show the same kind of potential that someone like andrews did to get his extension

lets just hope patterson becomes a player in the future

[Rome]

This move reeks of P.R. damage control.

No way is Patterson deserving of an extension yet.  For God's sake, he's only played 24 farging games in the NFL!

Whatever, though.  It ain't my money and I'm not paying him so what the hell do I care?

[Eaglez]

If he sucks he can be cut most likely without it hurting the cap. That's how Banner does it.

shtein if it thats easy why doesnt he do it every year with with a bunch of top notch free agents who have actually accomplished something in their nfl careers


i wonder what happens too if bunkley has a decent year next season...does he then go to the FO and ask for pattersons contract or even better

Well, because once a guy hits that FA market he's got the $ in his eyes. They played out their "paltry" rookie deals and are looking for a big payday. But he still structures those deals smartly (TO, Kearse, Howard, etc) where most of the hit are up front so later on down the life of the deal if they suck, get hurt or become psychotic they can cut ties relatively easy.

Here's the breakdown of the deal;

PATTERSON GETS PAID

The Eagles have signed defensive tackle Mike Patterson to a long-term extension, locking up the team's 2005 first-round draft choice through 2016 via a seven year extension that doesn't even begin to apply until 2010.

Under the contract, Patterson gets $4.5 million to sign and a $4.5 million roster bonus in 2007.  The salaries beginning in 2010 are $1.1 million, $1.4 million, $2.1 million, $2.9 million, $3.65 million, $4.9 million, and $6.25 million.

But since the only real guarantee is the $4.5 million signing bonus, and since that money prorates at $900,000 per year starting this year, there will be no cap acceleration if he is cut in 2010 or thereafter.

From 2010 and onward, then, the contract is a series of one-year deals -- and very reasonable salaries if Patterson becomes a stud.  And if he becomes a stud, he'll surely claim that he has outperformed his deal.

Before Patterson or his agents succumb to that temptation, they need to keep in mind the $9 million in bonuses that Patterson has received in exchange for voluntarily tying himself down for the next decade.

So they'll take half of the guaranteed hit in 2007 when he is still young. That roster bonus will count all in one shot next year. The remaining 4.5 is then prorated so it is a smaller cap number and thus easy to cut ties. And as the breakdown points out - if he is cut past 2010 then there is no hit.

This is a good deal. It keeps him here on the cheap and also protects the team.

Good stuff, bro.

[PhillyPhreak54]

while the deal may be good and i dont even think its anything special....it was not needed and the guaranteed money given to him in the next few years could have been much better used in the free agent market especially the direction this team is going they have to make a big splash in FA this year and probably next....especially with the downward direction this team is going they have to make a big splash in FA this year and probably next

or save the money for someone like bunkley justice herremans cole brown or any other players who may already be or one day turn into true studs...patterson simply was not deserving of this contract at this time...in the teams defense they did the same thing with brown and lito and it worked out tho they showed much more potential for greatness than has patterson...i think it would have been better to let patterson show the same kind of potential that someone like andrews did to get his extension

lets just hope patterson becomes a player in the future

That's the thing - the money is being used now. He's been cut a check for $4.5M now and will get another in 2007 and then thats it. Compared to what they will have to spend this is like us regular folk spending $20.

They'll still have money for Brown, Cole and the guys like that and to play the FA market. With the new CBA and the cap going up big time next year this is cheap.

And if he sucks, its not a cap breaker.

[ice grillin you]

doesnt matter whether its right now or next year there are players on this team much more deserving of that money than patterson

and you act like hes gonna suck and be cut at no cost or be great and be a steal...whats if hes completely vanilla as he is now and not good enough to make an impact on the field but not completely suck...they wont cut him and he will be eating up momney down the road and also be taking up a position on the field that could be filled by a much better player

thats one of the main problems with this front office...they go for the cheap solid player way to often instead of a much better more expensive guy


it all comes down to if he turns into a player or not....and with the combination of him having multiple years left on his current deal and his play not being extension worthy its way to early to say that he is indeed gonna be a player and thus receive this deal

war bye weeks

[PhillyPhreak54]

doesnt matter whether its right now or next year there are players on this team much more deserving of that money than patterson

and you act like hes gonna suck and be cut at no cost or be great and be a steal...whats if hes completely vanilla as he is now and not good enough to make an impact on the field but not completely suck...they wont cut him and he will be eating up momney down the road and also be taking up a position on the field that could be filled by a much better player

thats one of the main problems with this front office...they go for the cheap solid player way to often instead of a much better more expensive guy


it all comes down to if he turns into a player or not....and with the combination of him having multiple years left on his current deal and his play not being extension worthy its way to early to say that he is indeed gonna be a player and thus receive this deal

war bye weeks

No doubt - and there is still time to get those guys signed. Even if they don't get 'em done by the time the '06 deadline rolls around next week they can do it on next years cap. They have a ton of space to use. Prior to this deal they had about $9.7M in cap room. Next year it'll be around $30M.

If he is vanilla, then his salary will reflect that. Look at the base salaries and then think about what players will be making in several years. He will be below market value and be paid like an average DT. The market is going to blow up because of this CBA. So if he sucks, they cut him without damage. If he's a stud, they have a great deal. If he's just a guy, he's being paid like just a guy.

Agreed on it coming down to him being a player or not. And the Eagles are usually pretty good at projecting these things. So I defer to the history of locking up players like this...

[rjs246]

hate

[Diomedes]

Are you kidding me?  Everybody loves everybody.

[Beermonkey]

This move reeks of P.R. damage control.

It's strange seeing this from you. 

If people want to argue about whether he deserves it or not, great, but leave out this bit of conspiracy. You only feed the crackpots.

Two things. One, since when does this FO care about creating positive PR regarding signings/non-signings? Two, does this signing shift the focus off the lack of performance we have seen thus far in 2006? No, it does nothing at all to control any negative feelings.

[Eagaholic]

from ESPN:

At 5 feet, 11 inches tall, Mike Patterson didn't tower over other top defensive tackles available in the 2005 draft, but now he can say he towers over his draft class financially.

In a rare move (read as weird for a supposed "cheap" FO), Patterson agreed to a contract extension with the Philadelphia Eagles 24 games into his NFL career. The Eagles extended their 2005 first-round choice by rewarding him with a seven-year, $32 million extension that could be worth $37 million based on incentives and escalators.

The key to the deal, though, was $9 million in guarantees.

What makes this contract unique is that he's only 24 games into his rookie contract. In July, 2005, Patterson signed a five-year, $6.625 million contract that included $3.825 million in guarantees. By signing this extension, Patterson locked himself into $12.825 million in guarantees before his third year.

Why does ESPN, in it's infinite wisdon, call this "unique"? These are almost the same numbers Andrews just got. He received a $5 mil SB and a $5 mil roster bonus to count against the following year and was signed after his second year. Patterson got $4.5 mil SB and $4.5 mil roster bonus to count against the next year's cap.  Considering that Andrews was drafted higher, they are strikingly similar. Andrews is signed through 2015. Patterson, drafted a year later, is signed through 2016. The salary of Andrews last 3 years is $3.75, 5.25, and 6.25 million. Patterson's last 3 are $3.65, 4.9, and 6.26 million. Seems like pretty clear formula to me, not unlike the draft slotting. Maybe what ESPN meant by unique is that, although the numbers are the same, each player has a different  last name.