The Seahawks' deal is believed to be $2 million less than the Cincinnati Bengals offered Taylor. The Eagles made a late run at re-signing him with a reported six-year, $24 million offer that included a $1.5 million signing bonus
thats right folks........this guys actually took less money to be with a winner............sorry Duke.
When Ty Law gets pissed about not being on a Super-Bowl winning team, he'll know why Taylor signed for less money. I applaud him for realizing it's not all about the money - it's the ring that makes your memorable!
As long as the Seahawks can keep the same mojo they had last year, they're looking pretty tough on both sides of the ball.
The One, the Only, the Incomparable Mercer Boy. My My YouTube.
Seattle looks good, but I honestly can't say it is all about goign to the "winner" the eagles have been on the verge every year for a whiel now. Now the sign if not the top.c lose to it, FA's on either side of the ball and somehow goign to seattle is a move to go to a winner? Sorry, there is more there.
Also you need to look at how the contract is structured rather than the "total" -- it is always misleading. If the seahawk's guranteed more moeny in bonuses, then there you go.
Also, bear in mind tha tthe eagle offer crap contracts to free agents that are leaving for a reason. They do it, because they gain comepsnatory picks from the league when free agents walk. so if they are fifty fifty, they gain something by losing anyway.
Jsut a lot of issues with contracts etc in the nfl. contracts are never as they seem.
Last edited by eaglesrule on Wed Mar 24, 2004 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.