No Peyton in any of your top 5? Is it because he retired?

Just now, Mike030270 said:

No Peyton in any of your top 5? Is it because he retired?

I don’t think he played enough years To qualify imo. He only played in half of the decade. Missed all of 2011 and most of 2015. He played in just 73 games of a possible 160 for the decade. 

Just now, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I don’t think he played enough years To qualify imo. He only played in half of the decade. Missed all of 2011 and most of 2015. He played in just 73 games of a possible 160 for the decade. 

He broke a ton of records in that short time though

Pretty sure he still has records not touched

So one month until Week 1.

How are we feeling about the team?

 

For me, the offense comes down to how the OL plays.  Do Dillard and Peters play well enough for them not to be liabilities to the scheme.

On defense, it's the back seven in coverage.  New DB coach, a new corner, and no Malcolm will challenge them to become cohesive and play well.

11 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

He broke a ton of records in that short time though

Pretty sure he still has records not touched

He had a great 3 year stretch with the broncos. However the other parts of the decade he had one good year and one where he was basically carried. I don’t think 3 years is enough to justify top 5 of a decade when there’s been some great 3 years of guys careers and a bunch of very good seasons afterwards. 

If we are talking 2000-2009 he’s right up there with Brady. This decade you’d have to put Brady, Brees, Rodgers and Wilson ahead of him. I think Ryan, Big Ben and rivers played way more games to qualify then 73  its less than half the games played this decade. I’d argue the same thing for luck. Imo i think you have to play in at least 100 games to qualify That’s just over 60 percent. If he played that mark I’d have considered him a lock. 

I frankly think Matt Ryan has a better overall decade to be honest. Matt Ryan’s stats are ridiculous from this decade.

3932-5932 (66%) 44829 yards (4482.9 yards per season) 283 passing Tds (28.3 per season), 123 ints (12.3 per season) and 96.3 QB rating. 

2 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

So one month until Week 1.

How are we feeling about the team?

 

For me, the offense comes down to how the OL plays.  Do Dillard and Peters play well enough for them not to be liabilities to the scheme.

On defense, it's the back seven in coverage.  New DB coach, a new corner, and no Malcolm will challenge them to become cohesive and play well.

Dillard played well at LT so I'm not that worried. Honestly I'm more worried about Peters at RG than anything

IMO the secondary can only get better lol

I just hope players stay healthy for however long this season will be

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

He had a great 3 year stretch with the broncos. However the other parts of the decade he had one good year and one where he was basically carried. I don’t think 3 years is enough to justify top 5 of a decade when there’s been some great 3 years of guys careers and a bunch of very good seasons afterwards. 

I frankly think Matt Ryan has a better overall decade to be honest. Matt Ryan’s stats are ridiculous from this decade. 

3932-5932 (66%) 44829 yards (4482.9 yards per season) 283 passing Tds (28.3 per season), 123 ints (12.3 per season) and 96.3 QB rating. 

 

 

9 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

 

Again he only played 73 games out a possible 160. Matt Ryan has played over 150 games this past decade (159 to be exact— which is ridiculous) and has been consistent for 10 years. It’s nice he was great for 3 of the years with Denver. Then he completely bottomed out. So he did it for 4 of 6 years of the decade (missed an entire season and 2015 was not good). And didn’t play in the other 4. Sorry having 3 great years in a decade doesn’t make him top 5 when Ryan had an mvp year, a year where his stats were close to the mvp year and another great year plus 7 more good years. 

16 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

About the top 8 only ones I’d consider for top 5 of the decade. I still go Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Wilson and either Ryan, rivers or Big Ben  And i likely go Ryan after looking at the statistics. Manning is up there if he would’ve played 3 more years and put up the numbers he was before his massive drop off. But he didn’t. 

1 hour ago, Bacarty2 said:

Lost in everything is this

I'm not saying we would of made the right pick. Or even a worse pick. 

But if my options were winning a preseason game and getting just 1 pick higher, i take it every day of the week. 

Peyton is a lock for the Hall at least

3 hours ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Feel like everyone in 2017 benefitted from wentz’s ability to scramble around and make plays that year. Wentz was mvp so really everyone benefitted from that type of play. I gave agholor credit for that year. He was phenomenal on that last drive of the Super Bowl. The Eagles do not win that Super Bowl without some of his catches and some great throws by Nick Foles to him on that drive. The only thing I can complain about agholor and that Super Bowl was running out of bounds instead of staying in bounds on the last drive. 

I still maintain that it could be argued that getting the first down was more beneficial. I don't think it's clear cut either way, but I have zero problem with him getting the first down and giving the Eagles three more offensive plays. If he had intentionally stayed in bounds and been a couple yards short of the first, they might only get two more offensive plays. 

Now, if you can 100% guarantee that they'd have gotten the first down on one of the next two plays, then yeah, it would have been better if he had stayed in bounds. But I don't think guarantees like that can be made.

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

At this point in their careers I’d take josh allen over cam. I don’t know what cam newton is anymore. That shoulder might be completely deteriorated to the point where he’s shot and they go with the original plan Of stidham which imo they’d have the worst QB in the division at that point. Also if they struggling at first i could see belichick pulling cam going with stidham 

If Cam is healthy, I think he's a better QB than Allen.  I just think Allen has too many accuracy issues to be more than what he has shown so far.  I think Cam can be effective when he's healthy.  

 

1 hour ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

This isn’t the NBA... one player alone  (unless it’s a QB) isn’t going to make a huge difference. 
 

So rooting for your team to lose never makes sense unless then losing gets the #1 pick and the next Manning or Luck is coming out. Rooting for your team to lose and go from pick 19 to 14 is dumb.
 

Would rather the team’s young players play well and win to gain confidence. 

Maybe. I think there is a difference from 20 to 8 though. Not saying they should go into it with the mindset of trying to lose. As a fan that is different.

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

 

I realize this is a joke, but are they going into quarantine?

1 minute ago, NCiggles said:

If Cam is healthy, I think he's a better QB than Allen.  I just think Allen has too many accuracy issues to be more than what he has shown so far.  I think Cam can be effective when he's healthy.  

Is he finally healthy?

7 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

If Cam is healthy, I think he's a better QB than Allen.  I just think Allen has too many accuracy issues to be more than what he has shown so far.  I think Cam can be effective when he's healthy.  

Question is if cam is ever healthy to the point of where his shoulder was before. If it’s not then no. If he’s healthy and his shoulder holds up I’d agree. However i don’t trust a shoulder that’s given him issues for now 2 seasons. 

4 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

I realize this is a joke, but are they going into quarantine?

Hawks cut a player this morning for trying to sneak a girl into the team hotel.

Agholor as a W2/W3 where he can operate on his own terms is average to good. Where his issue arrive, is when he is asked to be the man or has the spotlight on him.  Agholor got better at being resilient, but he's still not what you'd call a pure number 1 WR.

Being on the Raiders as a part could be what he needs.  Either ways, it's not the Eagles problem

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

Hawks cut a player this morning for trying to sneak a girl into the team hotel.

Ah, thanks. So is this bubble just for camp or something that they are looking to do all season? Good idea. I haven't heard about the Eagles doing something similar.

18 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

I still maintain that it could be argued that getting the first down was more beneficial. I don't think it's clear cut either way, but I have zero problem with him getting the first down and giving the Eagles three more offensive plays. If he had intentionally stayed in bounds and been a couple yards short of the first, they might only get two more offensive plays. 

Now, if you can 100% guarantee that they'd have gotten the first down on one of the next two plays, then yeah, it would have been better if he had stayed in bounds. But I don't think guarantees like that can be made.

I think he would have gotten the first if he cut inside to attempt to evade Harmon. At the time I was really annoyed when th Agholor, but once he tried to outrun him to the edge he had no choice but to get the first.