9 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Big question. Why not keep feeding AJ Brown on the slant? He had 2 for 55 and was killing it with the YAC. Was it working too well?

You probably could've put a Madden player in to playcall and have gotten the same offensive result as we did yesterday.

5 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

You're trying to argue semantics.  Point is that this offense and Hurts isn't going to be looking to a washed Zach Ertz over AJ, DeVonta or Goedert in the redzone or outside of the redzone.  Zach Ertz in his prime was never some big redzone target.  He isn't going to suddenly become that for the Eagles here late in the season off the street. 

Ertez career stats.  Caught 4 tds last year in 10 games.  Gtfo here with Calcaterra, Albert O and Julio Jones. 

1 minute ago, Eagz said:

100%

A chance with Leonard and Ertz over the likes of Ellis, GC and AO is absolutely worth a stab in the dark given current predicaments, given the low cost to obtain them. Potentially so.e to gain and nothing really to lose.

Yep both are high reward/low risk moves. 

7 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

I don't know what the relevancy of that is.  He could be better and offer an upgrade as depth.  But that doesn't mean he would have any sort of impact if signed here.  He would more likely than not have the same level of impact that they have had.  

What impact have Grant Calcaterra and Albert O had?   Combined they have 0 receptions, but a number of drops.    Ertz can do that in his sleep.  

2 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Okay coach.  Jalen Hurts isn't going to change how he plays because the Eagles signed Ertz in week 14.  You're not an idiot.  You know full well that Zach Ertz wouldn't be come a big part of the offense if signed.  You're simply just arguing because you like to be a stick in the mud when it comes to any of my posts.  

I don't know many who think he would be "big". He's better than the other two and could give you a first down here or there or a target in the redzone. Heck, outside of Smith and Brown how many people made catches yesterday? 

He's also played in AZ and was hurt this year. That doesn't mean he's totally washed. He's a situational player I'd be happy with. 

1 minute ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Okay coach.  Jalen Hurts isn't going to change how he plays because the Eagles signed Ertz in week 14.  You're not an idiot.  You know full well that Zach Ertz wouldn't be come a big part of the offense if signed.  You're simply just arguing because you like to be a stick in the mud when it comes to any of my posts.  

12 personnel is what put Hurts on the map, lest we forget.  That and the RPO are what helped him become who he is today.   

Ertz will offer something where Julio offers close to nothing. Different positions, but one can be productive and offer Hurts an outlet. 

 

Ravens out of the Ertz mix. So I guess that leaves the Eagles, chiefs, bills

Hmmm... rewatched the two Deebo TD receptions. First one was where Reed got tackled (no call). 2nd one practically the entire San Fran offensive line except one guy was illegally down field pass the LOS before Deebo even caught the ball. At least one of those guys was beyond the LOS before Purdy threw the ball (no call). Eagles got a shot next time I'm convinced.

Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

What impact have Grant Calcaterra and Albert O had?   Combined they have 0 receptions, but a number of drops.    Ertz can do that in his sleep.  

 

What are you even trying to argue?  Would Ertz be an upgrade over them?  Yeah he likely would.  But he isn't the player he was and he isn't coming into this team late season to suddenly become a big part of the offense.  

In 5 games for the Eagles Julio has 5 receptions for 16 yards and a TD.  I'd be shocked if Ertz is signed and in the final 5 games his statistical output in the final 5 games is all that different than Julio's.  His primary purpose as a depth piece would be that if the worst case scenario happens and Goedert goes down again that maybe we wouldn't be so helpless when it comes to having a TE to pass to.  

 

People here are getting their hopes way too high for some potential impact that a Ertz signing would have on this offense.  It would be minimal if anything.  

Calcaterra gives you nothing. Albert O gives you nothing. Julio Jones gives you nothing. You could cut all 3 tomorrow and there would be no impact on this team. NONE. 

Zach Ertz, at his worst, has perfected how to find a hole in the zone to sit in. Now, that would require the Eagles knowing it would work and going to it but 7 yard button hooks to Ertz are money in the bank. There's absolutely nothing the Eagles are married to in this offense. Ertz isn't an All-Pro anymore but he's a savvy veteran who can help the Eagles and help Hurts. 

These guys aren't game changers anymore but if I'm Howie, I'm cutting Calcaterra, Albert and Julio and filling their spots with Adrian Amos, Shaq Leonard and Zach Ertz. None of them are what they once were but all of them are better than what the Eagles currently have and all of them bring experience that can only help.

 

2 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

Okay coach.  Jalen Hurts isn't going to change how he plays because the Eagles signed Ertz in week 14.  You're not an idiot.  You know full well that Zach Ertz wouldn't be come a big part of the offense if signed.  You're simply just arguing because you like to be a stick in the mud when it comes to any of my posts.  

Jalen Hurts needs to change how he played yesterday.  He held the ball way too long and it lead to bad things for the offense.  He needs to stop playing hero ball and throw the ball quicker.  

 

I am not an idiot, nor did I claim that he would become a big part of the offense if signed.  What I said was that he'd offer us more option in 12 personnel than Jack Stoll, because this team wants to throw the ball.   And if he catches just 4 passes, that would match Stoll, Calcaterra and Albert O's production combined.   I'm not expecting massive changes, I'm hoping for incremental improvement.  But, you want to claim that Goedert's feelings would be hurt by the idea of Ertz returning.  If he does, then that says a lot about him.  Shame on him.  But, I think that's just you projecting your thoughts on to him.   He's a professional and the goal of this team is supposed to win a Super Bowl.  If Ertz can offer ANY improvement at ANY level over what this team currently has available, then everyone should be in a favor.   Further it costs NOTHING to add him.  In other words, zero down side.  

 

17 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Big question. Why not keep feeding AJ Brown on the slant? He had 2 for 55 and was killing it with the YAC. Was it working too well?

 I’ve said the same thing since the Dallas game. They need to get him involved early and often. And keep feeding him as it’s almost unstoppable when he does that route. It’s either gonna be caught, Pi or a hell of a defensive play. The fact that the Eagles just completely go away from him for large stretches of games makes no sense. He is your best playmaker. He should be getting those slants at least two or three times a quarter just because of how affective they are. They are really instant offense. 

5 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

I don't know many who think he would be "big". He's better than the other two and could give you a first down here or there or a target in the redzone. Heck, outside of Smith and Brown how many people made catches yesterday? 

He's also played in AZ and was hurt this year. That doesn't mean he's totally washed. He's a situational player I'd be happy with. 

 

They aren't going to be looking for Ertz in the redzone or big moments needing a first down in a game.  Realistically how many targets would you think that Ertz gets here in the final 5 games if he is signed?  I'll put the o/u at 10.5 total targets in the 5 remaining games.  Would you take the over or under because I would take the under.  

52 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

I think that is expecting Ertz to come in and have any sort of noticeable impact is fooling themselves.  He isn't the same player anymore and the Eagles wouldn't change their offense to accommodate him.  He would ride the bench mostly and probably rarely ever get targeted when he is in games

  He would serve only as a depth piece in case Gowdert gets injured again. 

They already run 12 personnel but with Stoll. That's not changing the offense. It's already in the offense.

1 hour ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

 

I've been trying to tell anyone willing to listen for weeks now that jettisoning our CBs for new ones will not be the cure for what ails us.

6 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

12 personnel is what put Hurts on the map, lest we forget.  That and the RPO are what helped him become who he is today.   

 

What are you talking about?  His 2nd year when everyone outside of me here hated Hurts and said he sucked?  When the only WR worth a damn on the roster was a rookie DeVonta Smith?  So they went heavy TE until a disgruntled Ertz was finally traded a month into the season.

Brian Johnson isn't changing his offense in week 14 because the Eagles sign Zach Ertz to be a backup.  

Just now, RememberTheKoy said:

 

What are you talking about?  His 2nd year when everyone outside of me here hated Hurts and said he sucked?  When the only WR worth a damn on the roster was a rookie DeVonta Smith?  So they went heavy TE until a disgruntled Ertz was finally traded a month into the season.

Brian Johnson isn't changing his offense in week 14 because the Eagles sign Zach Ertz to be a backup.  

Err.  I’ve been pro Hurts since day 1, including the day he was drafted.  So you’re wrong there.

 

39 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

If the Eagles were to sign Ertz hoeany targets a game do you think he would get?

More than the backups they have now.  Stoll leads the backup group with 7 targets this year. With Goedert out he had 0 targets yesterday vs the 49ers.  Calcaretta has 0 targets all year, Albert O has 1 target all year, yesterday vs 49ers. 

Ertz this year so far: 43 targets, 27 rec, 187 yards, 1 TD as a backup (starter McBride has 74 targets).

The backup TEs provide nothing.  Ertz would at least get some targets and catches.

3 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

I've been trying to tell anyone willing to listen for weeks now that jettisoning our CBs for new ones will not be the cure for what ails us.

Agreed. It's the scheme that puts too much pressure on the LBs and Safeties.

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Jalen Hurts needs to change how he played yesterday.  He held the ball way too long and it lead to bad things for the offense.  He needs to stop playing hero ball and throw the ball quicker.  

I am not an idiot, nor did I claim that he would become a big part of the offense if signed.  What I said was that he'd offer us more option in 12 personnel than Jack Stoll, because this team wants to throw the ball.   And if he catches just 4 passes, that would match Stoll, Calcaterra and Albert O's production combined.   I'm not expecting massive changes, I'm hoping for incremental improvement.  But, you want to claim that Goedert's feelings would be hurt by the idea of Ertz returning.  If he does, then that says a lot about him.  Shame on him.  But, I think that's just you projecting your thoughts on to him.   He's a professional and the goal of this team is supposed to win a Super Bowl.  If Ertz can offer ANY improvement at ANY level over what this team currently has available, then everyone should be in a favor.   Further it costs NOTHING to add him.  In other words, zero down side.  

 

You don't claim that he would be a big part of the offense if signed?  Then why are you wasting both of our time arguing with me when that's my whole point.  I have no issue with signing Ertz.  He would be an improvement over the bottom of the depth chart for TE.  I'm just pointing out that he isn't going to be some savior or impact player on offense that people are talking themselves into thinking.  His impact would be no greater than what we have seen from Julio.

I'm not projecting any thoughts on Goedert.  I'm watching his response to a question where he made it pretty clear he isn't that excited about a potential return of Ertz.  

7 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

What are you even trying to argue?  Would Ertz be an upgrade over them?  Yeah he likely would.  But he isn't the player he was and he isn't coming into this team late season to suddenly become a big part of the offense.  

In 5 games for the Eagles Julio has 5 receptions for 16 yards and a TD.  I'd be shocked if Ertz is signed and in the final 5 games his statistical output in the final 5 games is all that different than Julio's.  His primary purpose as a depth piece would be that if the worst case scenario happens and Goedert goes down again that maybe we wouldn't be so helpless when it comes to having a TE to pass to.  

 

People here are getting their hopes way too high for some potential impact that a Ertz signing would have on this offense.  It would be minimal if anything.  

The question is, are you happy with status quo, given the stagnation in O? The thought of trying something different on depth end of the roster must surely be appealing?

Ertz is good depth when Goedert gets hurt next week. Offense has struggled without an efficient TE for 2 years now during Goedert's annual injury. That alone is why you sign him. Rest is gravy.

4 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

I've been trying to tell anyone willing to listen for weeks now that jettisoning our CBs for new ones will not be the cure for what ails us.

I’d still jettison Roby. He’s not good. They are using him on early downs and sometimes using ricks on 3rd down.