Nnamdi Asomugha Will Reportedly Be Asked to Restructure Contract With Eagles
According to Adam Schefter of ESPN.com, Asomugha needs to restructure his contract or he will be released:
When two sides meet this am, Eagles will ask CB Nnamdi Asomugha to restructure contract or they will release him. Asomugha guaranteed $4mil.— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) February 22, 2013
To say the least, this comes as no surprise because 2012 was an extremely frustrating season for Philadelphia.
Although Asomugha defended 12 passes and made 55 tackles, he wasn't the dominant shutdown corner we're used to seeing.
The Eagles gave up a 60.2 completion percentage, recorded a measly eight interceptions and allowed a league-high 33 passing touchdowns. It doesn't matter who resides in an NFL secondary; getting torched that many times warrants immediate change and reconstruction before the next season.
With prospective cornerbacks in the 2013 NFL draft such as Alabama's Dee Milliner, Mississippi State's Johnthan Banks, Florida State's Xavier Rhodes and Washington's Desmond Trufant, Philadelphia can certainly address the secondary in Round 1 and/or 2.
Factor in Asomugha's ridiculous contract after a disappointing season, and the Eagles are clearly planning on the worst-case scenario.
What do you want the Eagles to do with Nnamdi Asomugha?
The veteran cornerback also turns 32 years old before the 2013 campaign kicks off, so he's not exactly in his prime years. Combine the obscene amount of hype prior to 2011 kicking off (when Asomugha came aboard in Philly), as well as no postseason appearances over the past two years, and this current situation was to be expected.
On the bright side, a fresh start would also be great for Asomugha if he were to get released.
The guy is still capable of locking down man-to-man and making plays in zone coverage. Plus, the NFL's identity as a pass-oriented league will draw him some attention before the summer.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?