21 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Your solution is playing rookies more when they likely haven’t been showing out in practice, no ready to step into that type of expanded role, and going by combine numbers and cause you like to call them freakbeasts isn’t a great solution. The odds are against you as the only rookie who’s looked good so far this year in our draft class has been Carter. But since they are freakbeasts and have great combine numbers means clearly it’s the way to go. 

but freakbeastzzzzzzzzzzzzz and COmbine numberzzzzzzzzz

Don't bother man this dude hasn't been rational for some time now calling for workout warriors just to jump on the field because they timed well. F the instincts and knowing the positions just put them out there couldn't hurt right? smh

3 hours ago, Frankfurteagle89 said:

No one on this team could shut him down.

We don't know.  The Eagles have been letting top athletes who are certainly big and fast enough to cover Lamb sit and almost never play.   

Ringo - 207  4.36
Nolan - 239  4.39
VanS - 231 4.45

Ricks - 188 4.60

ras compare ceedee lamb v ricks as WR
https://ras.football/ras-compare/?&p1=20017&p2=20152&pos=WR
ras compare ceedee lamb v ringo as CB
https://ras.football/ras-compare/?&p1=19977&p2=20152&pos=CB

How about,  if Smith is sitting and/or VanS is sitting,  double team Lamb with either of the bigger and faster guys than Lamb,  and then tackle him hard when he catches a pass.  Lamb is their star. put a bigger, stronger, faster, but probably less agile, guy on him in a double team context.    Maybe play press man on Lamb and just hammer him at the LoS with Nolan or VanS, before Nolan or VanS rushes.   Try to see if one of those 2 can put Lamb on his ass.

 

 

4 hours ago, Frankfurteagle89 said:

This defense was definitely downgraded from a personell and talent standpoint.

disagree.

The defense That The Eagles Choose To Play was downgraded. 

But the Eagles haven't been using Nolan Smith (10 ras - better than Quinn physically - everything else the same at that spot) or Kelee Ringo (did the Eagles have a DB who ran 4.36 at 207 last year?) or VanSumeren (better ILB numbers than name who you want).

Those 3 all have at least some amount of rawness,  and the way to get rid of rawness is to have them actually play in games.  But the Eagles have been going with more polished vets who are at least a bit dinged up, who might not be as good as they were, physically,  and playing them as much as they possibly can.   

Do the Eagles even realize that it's not normal to have the starters play so much?

4 hours ago, Frankfurteagle89 said:

which LB isn’t on this team.

we don't know.   There are 3 players who are freakbeasts who almost never play. 

I could be the next Patrick Willis out there. We just don’t know. 

4 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I could be the next Patrick Willis out there. We just don’t know. 

I’m already the next Darrelle Revis. Nobody knows it but me  

 

In the words of Latrell spreewell how’s he gonna feed his family 

 

39 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I’m already the next Darrelle Revis. Nobody knows it but me  

 

 

56 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

In the words of Latrell spreewell how’s he gonna feed his family 

 

So he would have made more playing in TX or FL getting paid less. Smart agent

56 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

In the words of Latrell spreewell how’s he gonna feed his family 

 

If your grandkids will have FU money or if you’re homeless, it’s the place to be.  Anything better than homeless or worse than FU money stopping with the kids, best to look elsewhere.  

1 hour ago, Random Reglar said:

We don't know.  The Eagles have been letting top athletes who are certainly big and fast enough to cover Lamb sit and almost never play.   

Ringo - 207  4.36
Nolan - 239  4.39
VanS - 231 4.45

Ricks - 188 4.60

ras compare ceedee lamb v ricks as WR
https://ras.football/ras-compare/?&p1=20017&p2=20152&pos=WR
ras compare ceedee lamb v ringo as CB
https://ras.football/ras-compare/?&p1=19977&p2=20152&pos=CB

How about,  if Smith is sitting and/or VanS is sitting,  double team Lamb with either of the bigger and faster guys than Lamb,  and then tackle him hard when he catches a pass.  Lamb is their star. put a bigger, stronger, faster, but probably less agile, guy on him in a double team context.    Maybe play press man on Lamb and just hammer him at the LoS with Nolan or VanS, before Nolan or VanS rushes.   Try to see if one of those 2 can put Lamb on his ass.

 

 

Don’t want to sound rude, but you’re digging a hole the size of Texas with your crazy ideas. That’s just silly man. Now you want to have N. Smith play cornerback too to stop Lamb?! What’s your next idea? Make him the punter so we have a punter/gunner in one. With his speed he would be the first guy down the field and able to down his own punt or make the initial tackle. 
 

We don’t have anyone on our team that can stop Lamb, so they will need to find ways to limit his production. And it’s definitely not using Nolan Smith as a "sledgehammering” cornerback or whatever this new position would be called.

3 hours ago, Random Reglar said:

I think the stats will be good in the last 3 games.  If they're the worst at something now,  I don't think they will be after Giants x 2 and the Cardinals.

If they get lit up by Tommy D this season then I really don't wanna hear any excuses.

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

I think you’re gonna get more Nolan Smith, but acting like a rookie who missed a ton of time last year at Georgia and hasn’t done much all year is gonna suddenly just be thrown in there and not going to have his ups and downs is foolish.

I didn't say that Nolan Smith wouldn't have any downs.    If Nolan Smith is replacing Reddick for more snaps than he has been, Reddick is more rested and more 100% for the playoffs.  Nolan Smith,  Ben VanS, Kelee Ringo should be getting experience, so that the Eagles can have the great athletes who are raw in the playoffs with more experience, and more ups and fewer downs.  

Or they can continue to find hurt old players and play them until they wear out.    They seem to do that,  and I don't think that giving players so many snaps,  when the normal team doesn't is a good plan,  when the roster contains 3 players who are freakbeasts who can make big plays,  but are raw,  which is generally cured by playing.

 

54 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Brown played nickel too, and he’s an even worse projection there than Ricks.

I tend to think that nickel is one of the places you put your more agile dbs,  to keep up with an agile slot wr.   Brown's 3 cone and shuttle times,  as well as his 40 and 10 splits,  are all better than Ricks.  I would think that you wouldn't want Brown on a TE,  but he'd be good against a quick slot wr and against a rb.

RAS compare as CB Brown v Ricks.   Browns numbers are much better,   Brown is shorter though.  https://ras.football/ras-compare/?&p1=20017&p2=22997&pos=CB   

Looking at the numbers,   Brown as pass coverage vs a RB would work.   Nolan and VanS are freakbeasts,   but Nolan didn't do the 3 cone and the shuttle and VanS wasn't good at the shuttle and mid at the 3 cone.   Physically,  Nolan and/or VanS would be able to keep up with TEs, but might not have the quickness for smaller RB.   Brown doesn't really have the height for the TEs, but he should have the quickness (he didn't run shuttle or 3 cone) for RBs.

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

I’m guessing vanS isn’t that close to playing significant snaps on defense as an UDFA.

That is certainly possible, and it's possible that VanS rawness + freakbeast would give a better result over another players polish, but being not as big, not as fast,  more banged up.   I've been talking up VanS since before he was signed as a udfa.
Shouldn't we be giving VanS a look,  remembering the context of everyone complaining about how bad the LBs have been doing?  I haven't been jumping up and down saying something like "despite the fact that the ILBs have been great, give VanS a lot of snaps nonetheless."   It's a viable argument though because you want to give raw players snaps in order to get them less raw.  But I wasn't doing that.   But now that people are saying "oh,  the Eagles have nothing at ILB and other places" I'm saying that's all BS.   There's a 10 ras freakbeast at OLB who has the athleticism to play LB or DB (but not so sure about DL, typically a DL weighs more than 238), a ILB who isn't quite as big and fast as Nolan but plenty of both and strong, and a 4.36 40 207 DB who could in theory do CB or S.   But we haven't been seeing them.   

Nolan, Ringo and VanS I expect to make big plays because of their freakbeast.   Maybe there are errors too.   With the players who would be replaced at ILB or DB, are they giving up big plays?   Sometimes they are.  Are those players who would be replaced making big plays?  I'm not really seeing that.   I'm not as down on the starters as some are,   but they're not freakbeasts making big plays.  They're vets,  they're competent, generally,  but I haven't seen the awesomeness that I expect to see from Nolan Ringo VanS.  I don't expect wall to wall awesome right at the beginning, but I expect to see some of it.

 

1 hour ago, Frankfurteagle89 said:

I will assume that if they are truly better than what we are fielding, then they would be on the field.

I haven't memorized your general posting pattern. I generally don't do that.   I'm going to assume that all of your posts take the basic form that the Eagles coaching staff never makes any mistakes.   Probably every NFL team has fans that basically think like that.  It's not a weird way to think, and it's hard to argue with 10-2.

I've personally noticed a general pattern that the Eagles,  compared to other NFL teams,  try to keep the same players out there all game if they can.  D Smith is out there 97% of the time.  That's good because Smith and Brown are the only WRs who should get targets ever, and if either one were to get hurt,  the Eagles would lose and that would be ok because God's Will and the coaches are powerless to prevent raw players through giving them snaps. 

I would argue that the last 3 games of the season against worse teams is when you might want to get the snaps for the raw freakbeasts,  but if Lamb who is under 200 pounds and runs 4.5 is supposed to be an impossible physical challenge, he isn't.  The Eagles have a good number of raw players with better measurables.   Use the best cb on Cooks (Slay?) and the 2nd best cb on Lamb (Bradberry?) and pick a freakbeast who runs faster, jumps higher, is taller and stronger to double Lamb with.  The Eagles have a number of guys who are physically superior to Lamb to help the polished cb prevent Lamb from getting 100+ yards receiving. 

 

4 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

Can't it just be over and done with? You gave the discipline to both sides. What else is there to review? If you have to review more, don't hand out any punishments yet.

2 hours ago, judunno said:

Don't bother man this dude hasn't been rational for some time now calling for workout warriors just to jump on the field because they timed well. F the instincts and knowing the positions just put them out there couldn't hurt right? smh

Then you will cease talking about the defense as being bad.

If you think the existing starters are good, that's fine.  It means that there isn't a problem for the freakbeasts to solve. I'm good with that.

However,  if you think that there is a problem with the existing starters, then the solution is the freakbeasts. 

I still think it's smart to get a good number of game reps for backups in case of injury, or maybe even if the Eagles want to act like a normal team and not play your starters all the time.

Key point is that

either
1)  the starters aren't good enough,   in which case the Eagles have superior athletes who are raw
or
2) the starters are good enough,  in which case the Eagles don't need to use the freakbeasts yet

Do you understand the corner that you're painted into?

If not good,  use freakbeasts.   If good, don't worry about the freakbeasts.

What you will do is stop saying that the defense starters are inadequate, unless you want to use the freakbeasts.

5 minutes ago, Random Reglar said:

I didn't say that Nolan Smith wouldn't have any downs.    If Nolan Smith is replacing Reddick for more snaps than he has been, Reddick is more rested and more 100% for the playoffs.  Nolan Smith,  Ben VanS, Kelee Ringo should be getting experience, so that the Eagles can have the great athletes who are raw in the playoffs with more experience, and more ups and fewer downs.  

Or they can continue to find hurt old players and play them until they wear out.    They seem to do that,  and I don't think that giving players so many snaps,  when the normal team doesn't is a good plan,  when the roster contains 3 players who are freakbeasts who can make big plays,  but are raw,  which is generally cured by playing.

 

I tend to think that nickel is one of the places you put your more agile dbs,  to keep up with an agile slot wr.   Brown's 3 cone and shuttle times,  as well as his 40 and 10 splits,  are all better than Ricks.  I would think that you wouldn't want Brown on a TE,  but he'd be good against a quick slot wr and against a rb.

RAS compare as CB Brown v Ricks.   Browns numbers are much better,   Brown is shorter though.  https://ras.football/ras-compare/?&p1=20017&p2=22997&pos=CB   

Looking at the numbers,   Brown as pass coverage vs a RB would work.   Nolan and VanS are freakbeasts,   but Nolan didn't do the 3 cone and the shuttle and VanS wasn't good at the shuttle and mid at the 3 cone.   Physically,  Nolan and/or VanS would be able to keep up with TEs, but might not have the quickness for smaller RB.   Brown doesn't really have the height for the TEs, but he should have the quickness (he didn't run shuttle or 3 cone) for RBs.

That is certainly possible, and it's possible that VanS rawness + freakbeast would give a better result over another players polish, but being not as big, not as fast,  more banged up.   I've been talking up VanS since before he was signed as a udfa.
Shouldn't we be giving VanS a look,  remembering the context of everyone complaining about how bad the LBs have been doing?  I haven't been jumping up and down saying something like "despite the fact that the ILBs have been great, give VanS a lot of snaps nonetheless."   It's a viable argument though because you want to give raw players snaps in order to get them less raw.  But I wasn't doing that.   But now that people are saying "oh,  the Eagles have nothing at ILB and other places" I'm saying that's all BS.   There's a 10 ras freakbeast at OLB who has the athleticism to play LB or DB (but not so sure about DL, typically a DL weighs more than 238), a ILB who isn't quite as big and fast as Nolan but plenty of both and strong, and a 4.36 40 207 DB who could in theory do CB or S.   But we haven't been seeing them.   

Nolan, Ringo and VanS I expect to make big plays because of their freakbeast.   Maybe there are errors too.   With the players who would be replaced at ILB or DB, are they giving up big plays?   Sometimes they are.  Are those players who would be replaced making big plays?  I'm not really seeing that.   I'm not as down on the starters as some are,   but they're not freakbeasts making big plays.  They're vets,  they're competent, generally,  but I haven't seen the awesomeness that I expect to see from Nolan Ringo VanS.  I don't expect wall to wall awesome right at the beginning, but I expect to see some of it.

 

I haven't memorized your general posting pattern. I generally don't do that.   I'm going to assume that all of your posts take the basic form that the Eagles coaching staff never makes any mistakes.   Probably every NFL team has fans that basically think like that.  It's not a weird way to think, and it's hard to argue with 10-2.

Through all the years I’ve been on this platform I have typically just read the blog and stayed away from posting. Actually don’t know what has changed that I am doing so now. I will say that I keep it simple and don’t get into all the stats / measurables etc. And yes, I don’t think that I or any other fan is smarter than the coaching staff when it comes to the team and who they think should be on the field. Do I think they make mistakes?! Hell yeah I do! But they’re still the professionals and I’m the novice so I’m going to think that they know better than I do.
 

I've personally noticed a general pattern that the Eagles,  compared to other NFL teams,  try to keep the same players out there all game if they can.  D Smith is out there 97% of the time.  That's good because Smith and Brown are the only WRs who should get targets ever, and if either one were to get hurt,  the Eagles would lose and that would be ok because God's Will and the coaches are powerless to prevent raw players through giving them snaps. 

I would argue that the last 3 games of the season against worse teams is when you might want to get the snaps for the raw freakbeasts,  but if Lamb who is under 200 pounds and runs 4.5 is supposed to be an impossible physical challenge, he isn't.  The Eagles have a good number of raw players with better measurables.   Use the best cb on Cooks (Slay?) and the 2nd best cb on Lamb (Bradberry?) and pick a freakbeast who runs faster, jumps higher, is taller and stronger to double Lamb with.  The Eagles have a number of guys who are physically superior to Lamb to help the polished cb prevent Lamb from getting 100+ yards receiving. 

 

 

28 minutes ago, Random Reglar said:

I didn't say that Nolan Smith wouldn't have any downs.    If Nolan Smith is replacing Reddick for more snaps than he has been, Reddick is more rested and more 100% for the playoffs.  Nolan Smith,  Ben VanS, Kelee Ringo should be getting experience, so that the Eagles can have the great athletes who are raw in the playoffs with more experience, and more ups and fewer downs.  

Or they can continue to find hurt old players and play them until they wear out.    They seem to do that,  and I don't think that giving players so many snaps,  when the normal team doesn't is a good plan,  when the roster contains 3 players who are freakbeasts who can make big plays,  but are raw,  which is generally cured by playing.

 

I tend to think that nickel is one of the places you put your more agile dbs,  to keep up with an agile slot wr.   Brown's 3 cone and shuttle times,  as well as his 40 and 10 splits,  are all better than Ricks.  I would think that you wouldn't want Brown on a TE,  but he'd be good against a quick slot wr and against a rb.

RAS compare as CB Brown v Ricks.   Browns numbers are much better,   Brown is shorter though.  https://ras.football/ras-compare/?&p1=20017&p2=22997&pos=CB   

Looking at the numbers,   Brown as pass coverage vs a RB would work.   Nolan and VanS are freakbeasts,   but Nolan didn't do the 3 cone and the shuttle and VanS wasn't good at the shuttle and mid at the 3 cone.   Physically,  Nolan and/or VanS would be able to keep up with TEs, but might not have the quickness for smaller RB.   Brown doesn't really have the height for the TEs, but he should have the quickness (he didn't run shuttle or 3 cone) for RBs.

That is certainly possible, and it's possible that VanS rawness + freakbeast would give a better result over another players polish, but being not as big, not as fast,  more banged up.   I've been talking up VanS since before he was signed as a udfa.
Shouldn't we be giving VanS a look,  remembering the context of everyone complaining about how bad the LBs have been doing?  I haven't been jumping up and down saying something like "despite the fact that the ILBs have been great, give VanS a lot of snaps nonetheless."   It's a viable argument though because you want to give raw players snaps in order to get them less raw.  But I wasn't doing that.   But now that people are saying "oh,  the Eagles have nothing at ILB and other places" I'm saying that's all BS.   There's a 10 ras freakbeast at OLB who has the athleticism to play LB or DB (but not so sure about DL, typically a DL weighs more than 238), a ILB who isn't quite as big and fast as Nolan but plenty of both and strong, and a 4.36 40 207 DB who could in theory do CB or S.   But we haven't been seeing them.   

Nolan, Ringo and VanS I expect to make big plays because of their freakbeast.   Maybe there are errors too.   With the players who would be replaced at ILB or DB, are they giving up big plays?   Sometimes they are.  Are those players who would be replaced making big plays?  I'm not really seeing that.   I'm not as down on the starters as some are,   but they're not freakbeasts making big plays.  They're vets,  they're competent, generally,  but I haven't seen the awesomeness that I expect to see from Nolan Ringo VanS.  I don't expect wall to wall awesome right at the beginning, but I expect to see some of it.

 

I haven't memorized your general posting pattern. I generally don't do that.   I'm going to assume that all of your posts take the basic form that the Eagles coaching staff never makes any mistakes.   Probably every NFL team has fans that basically think like that.  It's not a weird way to think, and it's hard to argue with 10-2.

I've personally noticed a general pattern that the Eagles,  compared to other NFL teams,  try to keep the same players out there all game if they can.  D Smith is out there 97% of the time.  That's good because Smith and Brown are the only WRs who should get targets ever, and if either one were to get hurt,  the Eagles would lose and that would be ok because God's Will and the coaches are powerless to prevent raw players through giving them snaps. 

I would argue that the last 3 games of the season against worse teams is when you might want to get the snaps for the raw freakbeasts,  but if Lamb who is under 200 pounds and runs 4.5 is supposed to be an impossible physical challenge, he isn't.  The Eagles have a good number of raw players with better measurables.   Use the best cb on Cooks (Slay?) and the 2nd best cb on Lamb (Bradberry?) and pick a freakbeast who runs faster, jumps higher, is taller and stronger to double Lamb with.  The Eagles have a number of guys who are physically superior to Lamb to help the polished cb prevent Lamb from getting 100+ yards receiving. 

 

The literary equivalent to RTK's majestic artwork...can someone make this mad man stop

2 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I could be the next Patrick Willis out there. We just don’t know. 

Well,  we start by looking at the evidence we have. 

You know,  a rational process.

Anything?

45 minutes ago, Frankfurteagle89 said:

Don’t want to sound rude, but you’re digging a hole the size of Texas with your crazy ideas. That’s just silly man. Now you want to have N. Smith play cornerback too to stop Lamb?! What’s your next idea? Make him the punter so we have a punter/gunner in one. With his speed he would be the first guy down the field and able to down his own punt or make the initial tackle. 
 

We don’t have anyone on our team that can stop Lamb, so they will need to find ways to limit his production. And it’s definitely not using Nolan Smith as a "sledgehammering” cornerback or whatever this new position would be called.

The Eagles have 3 choices, at least.   Nolan, Ringo and VanS.

Each are bigger and faster than Lamb.

Now you are comforted.

 

30 minutes ago, Random Reglar said:

Then you will cease talking about the defense as being bad.

If you think the existing starters are good, that's fine.  It means that there isn't a problem for the freakbeasts to solve. I'm good with that.

However,  if you think that there is a problem with the existing starters, then the solution is the freakbeasts. 

I still think it's smart to get a good number of game reps for backups in case of injury, or maybe even if the Eagles want to act like a normal team and not play your starters all the time.

Key point is that

either
1)  the starters aren't good enough,   in which case the Eagles have superior athletes who are raw
or
2) the starters are good enough,  in which case the Eagles don't need to use the freakbeasts yet

Do you understand the corner that you're painted into?

If not good,  use freakbeasts.   If good, don't worry about the freakbeasts.

What you will do is stop saying that the defense starters are inadequate, unless you want to use the freakbeasts.

I'll cease posting about the bad defense when you cease posting your nonsense about 'freakbeasts' whatever the hell that means.

1 hour ago, Diehardfan said:

So he would have made more playing in TX or FL getting paid less. Smart agent

Probably how they negotiated the deal up so high

33 minutes ago, Random Reglar said:

Well,  we start by looking at the evidence we have. 

You know,  a rational process.

Anything?

You’re  welcome 

1 hour ago, Sack that QB said:

If they get lit up by Tommy D this season then I really don't wanna hear any excuses.

the Eagles haven't really been trying very hard to blow out teams this year.   I expect a 3-0 finish to the season, but Eagles fans will complain if Devito completes a pass, calling it "lit up".   

I mentioned before that I would want to see those great athletes who rarely play actually play.  The Eagles could do everything they possibly can to make sure they win over the Giants by 17,  but I'd rather the great athletes get more experience and the star vets get more rest.  It could mean a closer game,  but it really isn't clear to me at all the great advantage of the 1 seed over the 2 or 3 seed,  since it's pretty clear that the Cowboys look like a tougher opponent than the Lions, or whoever wins the North.  

44 minutes ago, aptosbird said:

The literary equivalent to RTK's majestic artwork...can someone make this mad man stop

I know what you mean.   Those aren't YOUR thoughts. And you disagree.  But, somehow,  you can't rebut.  But you want to.  You want to win the argument.  But, it's just not there for you.

So many here seem to have grave difficulties with ideas like "if the players on the field are playing badly,  try playing the other players, who are not playing."

I'm trying to help you by putting my basic ideas in as simple as form as possible.

Eagles "fans" here are saying 1) the players that play on the Eagles defense are bad.  and 2)  the players who aren't playing are also bad.

I'm not arguing that any of the Eagles players are bad.  I'm simply stating the fact that the Eagles have players we haven't seen in the regular season, who are great athletes who can outrun the supposedly unstoppable Lamb, they can outjump him, they are stronger than him and are bigger than him.  If the starters aren't stopping Lamb,  the Eagles have other options. 

"Use option 2 when option 1 isn't working" shouldn't be seen as too taxing for many.  It's really just common sense.  

40 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

You’re  welcome 

I've noticed you have a lot of free time to talk about all kinds of things.