Fletcher Cox will have $55.549 million fully guaranteed by March 2017

Getty Images

The Eagles have paid defensive tackle Fletcher Cox a lot of money. A lot of money. And a lot of that money will be fully guaranteed within only nine months.

Per a source with knowledge of the contract, a whopping $55.549 million will be fully guaranteed by March of 2017. At signing, $36.299 million in fully guaranteed.

The deal breaks down like this:

1. $26 million signing bonus;

2. $1.299 million fully-guaranteed base salary in 2016;

3. $6 million option bonus due in 2017, fully guaranteed;

4. $3 million fully-guaranteed base salary in 2017;

5. $11.5 million base salary for 2018, guaranteed for injury only at signing but fully guaranteed in March 2017;

6. $15.6 million base salary for 2019, $15.5 million of which is guaranteed for injury only at signing but $7.75 million becomes fully guaranteed in March 2017 and the other $7.75 million becomes fully guaranteed in March 2018;

7. $12.9 million base salary in 2020, plus a $1 million roster bonus due in March;

8. $15 million base salary in 2021, plus a $1 million roster bonus due in March;

9 $16.1 million base salary in 2022, plus a $1 million roster bonus due in March.

In all, it’s a six-year, $102.6 million extension, with a value at signing of $110.379 over seven years. $63.299 million is guaranteed for injury.

Given the structure of the deal, it will be virtually impossible for the Eagles to dump Cox before the guarantee fully vests. The cap charge for cutting him after one year would be $20.8 million, and the cap charge for cutting him after two years would be $20.4 million.

With Cox playing defensive tackle in the team’s new defense, Cox gets roughly $10 million more over the first three years than he would have gotten if he’s played out his rookie deal and been tagged for two straight seasons.

As noted earlier, this deal will make Broncos linebacker Von Miller very happy, giving him an apples-to-apples comparison that the Broncos will have a hard time characterizing as an anomaly or an aberration.

54 responses to “Fletcher Cox will have $55.549 million fully guaranteed by March 2017

  1. “That [No.] 91 is a good player,” Ryan said of Cox. “I was laughing when I saw him being compared to Jerome Brown, but I’m not laughing now.”

  2. Great deal for both sides. Scary to think how cox has been playing the past 3 years in a defense that doesn’t play to his strengths. Him in Jim Schwartz’s defense is going to be tough to stop.

  3. “As noted earlier, this deal will make Broncos linebacker Von Miller very happy, giving him an apples-to-apples comparison that the Broncos will have a hard time characterizing as an anomaly or an aberration.”

    It could also make the negotiations all the more contentious if the Broncos make the mistake of pointing out that not all apples are the same by bringing up Miller’s injury history, substance abuse and tag eligibility.

  4. Ouch! This is gonna make it hard for good teams with good players to keep good DL. Fletcher Cox is good but that defense is terrible and with that contract it ain’t getting any better.

  5. Is Cox that good?

    Also, Elway needs to be drug tested if he thinks he had a chance to sign Von Miller for less than 60 Mill guaranteed. He’s arguably the best defensive player in the league.

  6. Von Miller: “See? Now my price went up! Time to pay up, horseface!”
    And then maybe VM will uncrop Elway out of that White House pic…

  7. That’s a lot of money to get a guy double teamed

    Stupid move by the Eagles. Manage moves to fix bad contracts only to create a different one

  8. That should cover agholors champagne room dances in the future. They have tons of money tied up in qb and dt and few draft picks. This is not a good combo to improve the team in the future.

  9. Mad respect. This guy earned it. Best draft pick in a while for Philly. They traded up with Seattle, and struck gold. Never missed a game. Pro stats.
    Great to see a player exceed expectations thru hard work and drive.

    Millennials should take note.

  10. Yeah, this is the contract that is bad. Not the Malik Jackson and Oliver Vernon contracts. They are only making a little less and aren’t half the player Fletcher Cox is.

  11. skins4life2009 says:
    Jun 13, 2016 8:01 PM
    Lol he gets more then what the Broncos offered Von Miller, really? That’s ridiculous, he’s good but he isn’t close to the level of Von Miller. Haha you should have taken less and went to a team that is a contender. Enjoy winning nothing in Philly. Everyone knows the Redskins are just beginning their run of the NFC East.

    —–

    Depends how you look at it? Miller might be saying “really you offered me Cox type money” and in reality its Denver being cheap, and not Philly overspending..

  12. The problem with trying to compare Cox’s deal to Miller is the “ELWAY FACTOR”. John Elway is a ego maniac that believes playing for Denver is a privilege requiring players to take less to play for this storied franchise, in other words,……. he’s nuts!
    Von Miller will never get close to those numbers in Denver.

  13. Is it bad I have never heard of this guy?
    ———————-
    It’s not “bad”. It just shows you to be a very, very, casual football fan who doesn’t know who some of the best players in the league are.

  14. I love the move when they drafted Cox and now he is every bit the player I had hoped he would be,the best player in Philly for sure !

  15. Ouch, we’ll see how this plays out in 2-3 years. Eagles might be looking for a new capologist. That dead money! 24 million cap hit after 2 years?! Is the goal to handcuff the team to one player?

  16. And the federal government would like to thank the Eagles for the (and yet another) 27 million dollar donation.

    The Feds love Big Salary Syndrome.

  17. Playing a 2-Gap 3-4 for 3 of the 4 years which makes it harder to accumulate the flashy stats.

    Cox (first 4 years) 57 starts, 162 tackles, 22.5 sacks, 5 FF, 6 FR
    Suh (first 4 years) 62 starts, 135 tackles, 27.5 sacks, 2 FF, 1 FR

  18. broncomath101 says:
    Jun 14, 2016 8:58 AM
    Ouch, we’ll see how this plays out in 2-3 years. Eagles might be looking for a new capologist. That dead money! 24 million cap hit after 2 years?! Is the goal to handcuff the team to one player?

    _________________________________________

    Looks like they loaded up on guaranteed money in the first few years because they know they will most likely have Bradford unloaded this time next year, and have a very inexpensive qb for the next 5 yrs in Wentz. Youre rigtht that it definitely is a “wait and see” approach you have to have because he better not get complacent after snatching up 60 mil in guarantees.

  19. @taintedsaints2009 says:
    Jun 13, 2016 10:32 PM

    Is it bad I have never heard of this guy?
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    What’s bad is you posted your lack of football knowledge on this site. The good news though, is that you’re paying attention.

  20. It may work out for the Eagles but my first thought is it is way too much cap space for a single player. It handcuffs them in signing other FA’s.

    It would be better to take the Pats road and try to build depth while trying not to overspend.

  21. Eagles have already given extensions and locked up those who who they think will be the core of the team for the next several years.

  22. bighoser says:
    Jun 13, 2016 10:45 PM

    Von Miller: “See? Now my price went up! Time to pay up, horseface!”
    And then maybe VM will uncrop Elway out of that White House pic…
    —————————–

    More than likely Elway would crop Miller out of the team photo.

    The guy had 2 good games last season, and he has PED issues.

  23. Why compare stats to Suh? Miami made a monster mistake signing Suh. It’s a monster error signing a DT for that kind of guarantee. That includes Fletch.

    The Eagles don’t have a quality receiver (Mathews, no), Eagles don’t have a quality CB (nope), Eagles lack a proven RB (rookies don’t count & Ryan is an injury bug) but have now tied up $40mm in questionable QB’s & $60+mm guaranteed to a DT?

    That is a recipe for disaster. no pass game & no pass defense. Overpaid DT & QB’s.

  24. Ridiculous to pay a DT that kind of money — I don’t care how good he is.
    The way the Eagles are spending money, they are turning into the Redskins North. They are making Jerry Jones look (almost) smart.
    And they still won’t win anything.

  25. Why compare stats to Suh? Miami made a monster mistake signing Suh. It’s a monster error signing a DT for that kind of guarantee. That includes Fletch.

    The Eagles don’t have a quality receiver (Mathews, no), Eagles don’t have a quality CB (nope), Eagles lack a proven RB (rookies don’t count & Ryan is an injury bug) but have now tied up $40mm in questionable QB’s & $60+mm guaranteed to a DT?

    That is a recipe for disaster. no pass game & no pass defense. Overpaid DT & QB’s.
    ————————————————————-
    The comparison was made to show that even in a system where his talents were underutilized(2 gap) Cox put up comparable numbers to another DT that plays in the system Cox is moving into this year and is more natural of a fit(attacking). Also Suh was considered by many as the best DT. Especially for the comments that are saying “Who”.

    I am taking a wait and see approach because typically HR doesn’t put the Eagles in cap hell. I agree they have a lot of holes, especially RB and WR. I exect them to draft a RB next year. Bradford won’t be on the team after this year and then you have a QB on a rookie deal. On the CBs with 11 bodies competing this year the hope is three can be serviceable

  26. u4iadman says:
    Jun 14, 2016 10:50 AM

    Had the same thought….who?!

    Clocked this link just to see who Fletcher Cox is.

    SMH
    ——————————————————
    If you don’t know who he is you should probably stop posting on a football site!

  27. @u4iadman says:
    Jun 14, 2016 10:50 AM

    Had the same thought….who?!

    Clocked this link just to see who Fletcher Cox is.

    SMH
    ================================
    So what happened when you Clocked this link? If you don’t know, now you know!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!