The New Heights episode with Saquon is pretty good. 

🤣

13 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

🤣

I don't get it. Does he like to wear heels?

47 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

What are your thoughts on Garret Greenfield from South Dakota State?

He's not even the best OL on his own team (Mason Mccormick)

21 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

I don't think you're understanding the point. Hypothetically, if the Eagles were to take an OT prospect at 22 or say trade up for one of them with the intent of them being Lane's heir apparent and a stud book end OT of the future, and they didn't play well at OT, but moved over to guard and were great, that would not be viewed as a draft pick that worked out the way they wanted it to. Since the player would have been drafted to have been a tackle, a position considered generally more important and harder to find elite ones.

The point is more that G/T hybrids have less success at tackle. I wasn't saying they can't be successful at guard. What I'm saying is the importance of their success at guard is limited because quality guards are easier to find and are a less valuable position.

You're moving the goalposts. Sorry. 

I also find it problematic that you seem to be devaluing the guard position. Historically, guards have been paid less than tackles but that seems to be changing.

Just now, just relax said:

You're moving the goalposts. Sorry. 

I also find it problematic that you seem to be devaluing the guard position. Historically, guards have been paid less than tackles but that seems to be changing.

Yup.

Laremy Tunsil played his first NFL season at LG. Turned into an top 5 LT.
Tyler Smith was a top 5 LG for 2 straight years. Even if he never plays OT, Cowboys aren't regretting that.

Rock-solid OL are immensely valuable.

8 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I don't get it. Does he like to wear heels?

He's kind of effeminate.  Cried after a loss with his mom. Paints his nails sometimes I think. Think Jalen Ramsey. He gets a lot of crap for it. And to be fair he does seem like a bit of a weirdo (again think Jalen Ramsey). Still a bit overblown IMO.

1 minute ago, DEagle7 said:

He's kind of effeminate.  Cried after a loss with his mom. Paints his nails sometimes I think. Think Jalen Ramsey. He gets a lot of crap for it. And to be fair he does seem like a bit of a weirdo (again think Jalen Ramsey). Still a bit overblown IMO.

I wouldn't care what Hurts does or dresses like as long as he wins us games 🤷‍♂️

13 hours ago, Sack that QB said:

I hate the idea of drafting G/T hybrids. I can't remember the last one taken with a high pick who turned into a stud top tier OL. You see it more often with G/C than G/T. Every time I see someone say "The Eagles should draft someone who can play guard and then kick over to tackle when Lane retires." NO. Stop. They should be drafting someone who projects to be a stud tackle or a stud guard, preferably stud tackle since they're a more premium position. And if they can play a little guard, fine, but you aren't drafting a tackle early to play guard. You'd be drafting them to be your OT of the future. And if they can't play guard, that should be fine. The last thing you want to do is be shortsighted and draft a lesser OT prospect simply because he can play some guard now.

It's one of the reasons I disliked the Steen pick. He didn't project as a stud at either guard or tackle. He's a tweener. He has no future as a starter in the NFL. Any players in rounds 1-3 should be taken with the idea in mind they can be long-term starter for you or have top tier potential. You shouldn't be taking players you project as backups with a 3rd rounder.

Eagles like G/Ts. Steen, Kinnard, Toth, F. Johnson.  They also like C/Gs.  Jurgens, Poe, L. Smith, Hennessy.  I think Poe and L. Smith have too short of arms to play G but can play C.  Hennessy is a bit light at G next to Jurgens.  But note that L. Smith, Hennessy and Toth have more starts at G than Steen.  Steen, Hennessy and L. Smith are all listed as OL.  Toth is listed as a G/T. Jurgens as a C/G and Poe as a C.  Kinnard and F. Johnson are listed as Ts.  Other than Jurgens, those are the backups right now.  I can’t see the Eagles not drafting at least one OL.  In OTAs, I suspect Steen gets first go at RG regardless and Jurgens at C.  I imagine Hennessy is the back up C.  Wouldn’t be surprised to see Toth as back up at one G.  Curious to see who plays back up RG and backup RT.  Choices for those spots are L. Smith at G and Kinnard or T reps for Steen at RT.  I suspect with the third team, we see Toth at T, Hennessy at G, Kinnard at G, Poe at C. Plus you know there will be a rookie and I suspect that is a RT.  Possibly a rookie IOL too.  But whoever are the back ups, I expect them to play multiple positions on the OL.  

11 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

A smaller hedge plus planning for the future while also planning to run more 12 personnel. 

I don’t disagree with your overall point. But I do think they had higher expectations for Steen than just depth at the time they drafted him. If he weren’t to develop as a starter somewhere in his second year, I think the Eagles FO would secretly admit he’s not meeting expectations they originally thought. 

I don't know what the expectations for Steen were but I don't think he was penciled in as a starter.  I believe Jurgens was always going to be the starter.  I agree that Steen fell down the depth chart but it's not like they kept Opeta.  The thing is that he will have an opportunity to push for a starting spot at RG.  Just like Seumalo ultimately turned into an above average guard, I think they will let him develop.  

1 hour ago, just relax said:

Those who’ve been around the Blog for a while are familiar with my mantra: you pass with tackles and you run with guards. That still holds true.

In terms of OL, we have five starters, counting Steen, and a lot of questions behind them. I like Hennessy inside but after that, I have questions. IThere are a number of promising tackles and I expect and hope we draft one in the first. Seven guys who can play is the absolute minimum for an OL. Someone said we shouldn’t draft a tackle when Lane has four more years. I don’t want to call them out for silliness so the poster shall remain nameless. But four years? Really? And what do we have if either Lane or Mailata misses time and we don’t have a legit tackle to put in? The wheels will come off.

It's a deep draft for o-linemen.  The Eagles shouldn't pass up talent at a premium position.  

11 minutes ago, just relax said:

You're moving the goalposts. Sorry. 

I also find it problematic that you seem to be devaluing the guard position. Historically, guards have been paid less than tackles but that seems to be changing.

That's where we disagree. I value the guard position a lot. I think they are easier to find though. It's much more difficult in the NFL to find top tier tackles than guards IMO which is why tackles, all things being equal, will go off the board first 100 times out of 100 before guards. But my point is not that you can't take a guard in the first round. It's if you take a player in the first round expecting them to be a top tier tackle, and they don't become that and you have to move them to guard, that is a draft pick not working out the way it was intended.

Just to throw a random name out: if the Eagles traded up for Fuaga in the first round, and he stunk at tackle, and then they moved him over to guard and he is really good, that would be their draft pick not working out. Because they would not have traded up for him if they thought he couldn't be a tackle, nor would they likely have drafted him in the first round to begin with. That doesn't mean he can't be a valuable part of a football team. Of course he could. But the draft pick still would not have worked out even with that since that's not how it would have been intended to work.

The same would apply to if the Eagles took a WR in round 1 and they sucked at WR, but they moved them over to TE and they were good at TE. That would be a draft pick not working out. That doesn't might I think TEs aren't valuable. But WRs are more valuable and if the Eagles knew the player would suck as a WR and had to be moved, they wouldn't have drafted them in the first round.

Me personally, given the Eagles current position with their roster and Lane's age, if I'm going OL in round 1, especially given their other glaring needs, it has to be someone who can be Lane's heir apparent, because replacing him when he retires is absolutely huge. If the Eagles pass on a stud CB prospect or an edge rusher prospect to draft an OL, he better be a damn good OT, not an OT who sucks but has to be moved to guard. And if not, I'm sorry, that pick is a failure. If you disagree with that fine, but I stand by my take on that front.

Apologies if already posted.  It is really that simple.

 

Rosenberg must have a great agent. I've never seen Garafolo, Fowler, Rappoport and other national media sing praises for a VP of a team

37 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I don't get it. Does he like to wear heels?

He wears nail polish and is a momma's boy so folks making jokes.

41 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I don't get it. Does he like to wear heels?

 

 

55 minutes ago, WentzFan11 said:

The New Heights episode with Saquon is pretty good. 

Yeah let's you get to know Saquon a bit more. He's humble but hungry should be an interesting year with him and he has the drive to be better than cmc and even gave him props as the best current running back.

11 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Rosenberg must have a great agent. I've never seen Garafolo, Fowler, Rappoport and other national media sing praises for a VP of a team

Is he the cap magician? I always thought it was just Howie

4 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

Is he the cap magician? I always thought it was just Howie

Howie gets all the public recognition but he has a team of accountants handling cap stuff. It's hard to say who exactly gets credit for what from the outside, but Rosenberg was his top lieutenant. He's basically Howie when Reid/Banner were still here. 

7 minutes ago, NOTW said:

 

 

NFL Dennis Rodman

38 minutes ago, just relax said:

You're moving the goalposts. Sorry. 

I also find it problematic that you seem to be devaluing the guard position. Historically, guards have been paid less than tackles but that seems to be changing.

Red Queen effect.

LTs were paid far more than RTs, then teams started putting speed rushers on both sides and RTs had to become more athletic and pay discrepancy evened out.

Short passing game made pass rushing DTs more valuable (quickest path to a QB), they became premium assets, and guards with the quick feet to block them became more valuable.

Relative values have changed as strategy changes on both sides of the ball.

1 hour ago, paco said:

So.... the jets?

 

Jets have silver pants?

25 minutes ago, tuffstuff07 said:

Yeah let's you get to know Saquon a bit more. He's humble but hungry should be an interesting year with him and he has the drive to be better than cmc and even gave him props as the best current running back.

Sucks that Jason already lost like 20 pounds. He’s gone 😞 

1 hour ago, NCiggles said:

I don't know what the expectations for Steen were but I don't think he was penciled in as a starter.  I believe Jurgens was always going to be the starter.  I agree that Steen fell down the depth chart but it's not like they kept Opeta.  The thing is that he will have an opportunity to push for a starting spot at RG.  Just like Seumalo ultimately turned into an above average guard, I think they will let him develop.  

That's true. People like myself sometimes forget it takes time for players to develop.