17 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

We will very predictably face the potential scenarios come roster cut down for this season: of choosing short term versus longer term. This is difficult for me. Because feel we are smack dab in the middle of our greatest dynasty run. All In team for this season. So really can’t afford much dead weight on the roster. Especially no fourth or fifth RB like Sermon on the actual 53 instead of PS. PS really had evolved over the past..what? Decade almost. PS players now really get involved week to week on the field. So it’s not like the old days anymore. So actually stashing and protecting a player or two on the 53 man roster is much more feasible. Our main stash spot still being the IR. But IR players can’t get involved practicing. So young guy or two developing really need to be on the 53 to do so….if we fear them getting poached if left to the PS.

So gotta figure out the proper balance between All In and young players needing to develop.

Good post. Regarding your yellow highlighted sentence, I agree 100%, and this year is going to be another year like the first two Mailata years, with Hinton and Williams and Pierce all being developmental Stoutland University OL we don’t want to lose.

We may find that the RB from Florida fits that too. I’ve been told you really liked Shady, and Johnson has al lot of Shady and Saquon characteristics. We may see Dillon go either to the Practice Squad or to the IR.

Speaking of IR (and your three bolded sentences) the rule change implemented vis-a-vis IR this year will help. Specifically, the 53-man cut off is actually really as much as 55 because two players can be put on IR before the final cuts and be eligible for reactivation during the season. In prior years a player put on IR during TC was on IR for the whole season, ineligible for reactivation. Dillon with his stinger is a very logical candidate for those IR spots 54 and 55.

15 minutes ago, mattwill said:

You clearly haven’t been paying attention attention … or reading the posts in this thread. But to help you out of your fog, it’s a 5th Round pick in 2026, which can escalate up to a 4th Round pick if certain conditions (as yet unknown) are met.

Yeah…try to play catch up here…no need for the statement to have any of that beggining attached…but appreciate you filling me in.

23 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

One big decision surrounds cut day is guys making the 53 that are headed to IR. Trying to remember all the exact rules….but believe if you never make the active 53 on cut day and just straight are IR the entire time that leaves you out of any opportunity to even get off IR during the season to become active. Like Dean for instance….think even if not cleared to play…we have to officially make him part of our 53 at cut day. Then can place him on IR designation to return. There seems to be some confusion on whether at the time placed on IR whether you need to label one of your Designated to Returns or not. I don’t have the concrete answer on this. Seems media and insiders talk about it a bit confusing…muddling what the actual rules are. Do know there are a couple pretty big Eagles Media believe you have to label Designated or not right when you place players on IR. You only get a few IR players can return each season. One player can’t return a third time.

See my comment above about the new IR rules this year.

16 minutes ago, mattwill said:

You clearly haven’t been paying attention attention … or reading the posts in this thread. But to help you out of your fog, it’s a 5th Round pick in 2026, which can escalate up to a 4th Round pick if certain conditions (as yet unknown) are met.

So my educated guessing was pretty spot on. Disappointing fifth…graduating to a fourth would be very key difference.

19 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

So usually there are four players(give or take) make our 53 but then head to IR. So a moment of risk for four actual key players we are placing on the 53 that are exposed to all poachers have to pass through waivers. Then can make the official switch. Our long snapper be a perfect player to just let sit out in the wind already realizing and being told entire situation of swapping out for the IR player…essentially made the team …in every way but technically official just on that roster cutdown day.

Your four from prior years would only be two this year.

17 minutes ago, mattwill said:

It is ESP, so take it with a grain of salt, but …

Since 2020, the bar Joe and I set(as we would for any QB) has become reality. Hurts matured last season. We saw the transition from BONEHEAD "street gambler" to calm/ controlled QB. All the things we were labeled "haters" for has been overcome. The growth was culminated last year. The stellar supporting cast is intact and I fully expect another SB run

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

So my educated guessing was pretty spot on. Disappointing fifth…graduating to a fourth would be very key difference.

"I.me,my We ALL had a 5th for him, but I keep forgetting we are uneducated because you told us so

3 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Yeah…try to play catch up here…no need for the statement to have any of that beggining attached…but appreciate you filling me in.

No "need” but rather an "acknowledgment” that you chose to skip over a considerable number of posts. Even when I am behind I read every single post until I am caught up. That is just common courtesy to the other posters like yourself who are sharing their wisdom, their humor, and their questions.

I was exhorting you to do better.

6 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Good post. Regarding your yellow highlighted sentence, I agree 100%, and this year is going to be another year like the first two Mailata years, with Hinton and Williams and Pierce all being developmental Stoutland University OL we don’t want to lose.

We may find that the RB from Florida fits that too. I’ve been told you really liked Shady, and Johnson has al lot of Shady and Saquon characteristics. We may see Dillon go either to the Practice Squad or to the IR.

Speaking of IR (and your three bolded sentences) the rule change implemented vis-a-vis IR this year will help. Specifically, the 53-man cut off is actually really as much as 55 because two players can be put on IR before the final cuts and be eligible for reactivation during the season. In prior years a player put on IR during TC was on IR for the whole season, ineligible for reactivation. Dillon with his stinger is a very logical candidate for those IR spots 54 and 55.

Well y'all know I am pulling hard for my boy MJ. Already said when I first saw his vid, that he had "Barkley moves". What a fabulous find

21 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/25201606-tj-watt-steelers-reportedly-expect-agree-new-contract-start-nfl-season as of 2 mins ago LOL

I actually gave it decent consideration comparing trading for Watt or Hendrickson. Really was leaning towards Hendrickson. Know probably not the prevailing opinion. Just really was seeing Hendrickson as such a proven consistent great option. Huge gap in name fame between the two. But that’s the pitfall. Hendrickson I concluded would have to be cheaper …less needed to give up to the Bengals for the trade. Also financially the new contract I’m guessing for Hendrickson would be substantially less than Watt.

6 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

So my educated guessing was pretty spot on. Disappointing fifth…graduating to a fourth would be very key difference.

I would say it falls smack in "mid-Round”. Rounds 1 and 2 being early-Round, Rounds 6 and 7 being late-Round.

2 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I would say it falls smack in "mid-Round”. Rounds 1 and 2 being early-Round, Rounds 6 and 7 being late-Round.

Yeah…fifth a GM wanting to put a bit of spin on would be labeled mid round pick.

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I actually gave it decent consideration comparing trading for Watt or Hendrickson. Really was leaning towards Hendrickson. Know probably not the prevailing opinion. Just really was seeing Hendrickson as such a proven consistent great option. Huge gap in name fame between the two. But that’s the pitfall. Hendrickson I concluded would have to be cheaper …less needed to give up to the Bengals for the trade. Also financially the new contract I’m guessing for Hendrickson would be substantially less than Watt.

Not sure Howie would spend the loot for either of them

7 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

"I.me,my We ALL had a 5th for him, but I keep forgetting we are uneducated because you told us so

Who pissed in your Cheerios today?

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Yeah…fifth a GM wanting to put a bit of spin on would be labeled mid round pick.

Depends how achievable the fourth round stipulations are a fair amount in it also.

A 5th that can become a 4th clearly fits mid round pick labeling….before everything became totally official that is

20 hours ago, mattwill said:

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2025/5/25/24436798/nfl-news-roger-goodell-integrity-salary-cap-2025-quote-analysis?_gl=1*k67okt*_ga*ODkwNjkxNzY5LjE3NDU3MTQxMzA.*_ga_2M5GYNY1YS*czE3NDg5MjExOTgkbzM5JGcxJHQxNzQ4OTIxMzcyJGoyMiRsMCRoMA..

This I already shared. But glad you saw it either way. Still think it’s just paranoia Goodell and the front offices have it out for us?

5 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Who pissed in your Cheerios today?

"So my educated guessing was pretty spot on." It's the "I called it" syndrome

20 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

AKA the system needs dumbed down so others can compete

No…it’s Goodell and the league coming after us in every way they can. Start with the SB field in ‘22. Everything in between…goes to Goodell and Vincent were spearheading the Brotherly Shove ban. Packers not having an owner made them perfect cover. But the Pack original proposal stunk. Goodell talked them into delaying that vote. All so the entire power of the league could get behind getting the play removed.

8 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Yeah…fifth a GM wanting to put a bit of spin on would be labeled mid round pick.

What do you consider the mid-rounds to be?

Goodell got full lobbying team by team. Which made it so his huge army of lawyers could word the proposal just right to get every vote they’d need.

20 hours ago, mattwill said:

The NFL Players Association will never let the Collective Bargaining Agreement eliminate void years like the Commissioner wants. The players get more cash sooner when void years are used like Howie uses them.

Not sure players association can stop this though. Might be an area league offices can just control here.

13 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I actually gave it decent consideration comparing trading for Watt or Hendrickson. Really was leaning towards Hendrickson. Know probably not the prevailing opinion. Just really was seeing Hendrickson as such a proven consistent great option. Huge gap in name fame between the two. But that’s the pitfall. Hendrickson I concluded would have to be cheaper …less needed to give up to the Bengals for the trade. Also financially the new contract I’m guessing for Hendrickson would be substantially less than Watt.

If we got either Watt or Hendrickson I believe that would be a win.

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

No…it’s Goodell and the league coming after us in every way they can. Start with the SB field in ‘22. Everything in between…goes to Goodell and Vincent were spearheading the Brotherly Shove ban. Packers not having an owner made them perfect cover. But the Pack original proposal stunk. Goodell talked them into delaying that vote. All so the entire power of the league could get behind getting the play removed.

The fact he doesn't like how the Eagles have an edge at GM and his statements are an admission that he wants the Eagles DUMBED DOWN so others can be on an equal plane

20 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Like the attempted Tush Push ban. If you are winning you are doing something illegal and we need to put a stop to that nonsense immediately

But Brady got special rules and ref calls. They went all in greedy after all the loot generated from having that king…fans tune in to root for him…tune in to root against him just as much.