Just now, ManuManu said:

Why IR Watkins? Why keep two slot-only WRs?

Only based off of the practice reports.  Reagor, JJAW and Hightower were stars.  Ward is as steady as they come per reports and Burnett has made highlight catches in every practice.  

Watkins started out strong but out of the top WR it seems he hasn't performed to their level.  He still had great reports, just seemed as he tailed off a bit.  He has an injury right now, granted we don't know what it is or how serious.  I'm just looking at roster numbers and how to keep guys who have earned a spot.  Burnett IMO, has earned a spot.  Watkins has more potential however.  You can't release him.  He's a stick.  IR him, let him bulk up and come back ready next year.

17 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

For a number 4 pick in the first round and all the hype around him being the next dominate back those numbers have him being a border line bust. 

Fixed

3 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

I wouldn't say its a hoax because I have seen it first hand a lot. However the article is saying the numbers are a bit skewed for different reasons. I work in the medical field and I personally have seen some of these issues that drive the number higher then it should be for different reasons. yes that doesn't support his comment of its a scam, but the article has some valid points on the true numbers being inaccurate. 

I wasn't the one saying it's a hoax.  I do think the numbers are severely inaccurate though.  In PA alone, some 65% of deaths have been in nursing homes and you have to question, if Gov. Wolf didn't order them back in to the homes would the numbers be as high?

As far as high risk...Yes we have an obese country.  So many people make themselves high risk 100% because of their personal lifestyle.  You could not smoke, not eat like crap, decide to not exercise, not drink and so on.  This is not taking away from people with cancer, heretic diabetes and other underlying issues but how many of these high risk individuals could simply change their lifestyle and lower their risk? 

Again, with such skewed, inaccurate numbers reported from the very beginning is it worth still having things shut down to the extent they are?  Our county coroners weren't just blowing smoke when they questioned the deaths back in late March/early April.

11 minutes ago, RLC said:

NFL players not getting Covid-19 because they're practicing social distance, wearing masks and getting daily tests is not proof that Covid-19 is a hoax. 

Like every other developed nation that has taken the disease seriously and decreased the spread of the disease.  

7 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Only based off of the practice reports.  Reagor, JJAW and Hightower were stars.  Ward is as steady as they come per reports and Burnett has made highlight catches in every practice.  

Watkins started out strong but out of the top WR it seems he hasn't performed to their level.  He still had great reports, just seemed as he tailed off a bit.  He has an injury right now, granted we don't know what it is or how serious.  I'm just looking at roster numbers and how to keep guys who have earned a spot.  Burnett IMO, has earned a spot.  Watkins has more potential however.  You can't release him.  He's a stick.  IR him, let him bulk up and come back ready next year.

It goes beyond earning a spot. It’s about roster construction. We will never want Burnett and Ward on the field at the same time. They can’t coexist. And we want to develop Watkins. It’s hard to do on IR. 

3 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

I wasn't the one saying it's a hoax.  I do think the numbers are severely inaccurate though.  In PA alone, some 65% of deaths have been in nursing homes and you have to question, if Gov. Wolf didn't order them back in to the homes would the numbers be as high?

As far as high risk...Yes we have an obese country.  So many people make themselves high risk 100% because of their personal lifestyle.  You could not smoke, not eat like crap, decide to not exercise, not drink and so on.  This is not taking away from people with cancer, heretic diabetes and other underlying issues but how many of these high risk individuals could simply change their lifestyle and lower their risk? 

Again, with such skewed, inaccurate numbers reported from the very beginning is it worth still having things shut down to the extent they are?  Our county coroners weren't just blowing smoke when they questioned the deaths back in late March/early April.

Sorry you just posted the article. It was a different guy saying it was a scam that they quoted. bacarty

38 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

thats because the only thing coming of light with Covid is that it's a scam

Believe I hear 94.8% of all deaths had major under lying medical conditions and that it's "not as serious as once thought" 

Hence the reason Murphy (NJ GOV) was forced to open indoor seating much much sooner

This is 100% incorrect and is based on an incorrect reading of a CDC statement.

1 minute ago, Desertbirds said:

This is 100% incorrect and is based on an incorrect reading of a CDC statement.

What else is new? Lets keep spreading meme's and conspiracy theories instead of just accepting it, doing something about it, and moving on from it like almost every other country. 

4 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

It goes beyond earning a spot. It’s about roster construction. We will never want Burnett and Ward on the field at the same time. They can’t coexist. And we want to develop Watkins. It’s hard to do on IR. 

I know, I'm just looking at scenarios.  I can see this one being an option.  Burnett would be your #6 so hardly seeing the field at all anyway.  Do the Eagles ever run 5 WR at once let alone 6?  You still have plenty of options to mix your WR up.

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

If that’s the case you might as well IR Jeffery as the rules for this year have changed. 

Pretty sure the player has to be on active roster opening day to be eligible for recall from IR. Makes better sense to keep,Jeffery on PUP. 

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

What else is new? Lets keep spreading meme's and conspiracy theories instead of just accepting it, doing something about it, and moving on from it like almost every other country. 

That would involve people having to admit they were wrong. Can’t have that. 

So if there is a fire in a nursing home and the residents are too old to escape quickly, are you going to argue that the fire didn't kill them?

2 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

This is 100% incorrect and is based on an incorrect reading of a CDC statement.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR2-muRM3tB3uBdbTrmKwH1NdaBx6PpZo2kxotNwkUXlnbZXCwSRP2OmqsI
 

what’s incorrect? Only 6% are COVID only deaths, all others died WITH covid with and average of 2.6 underlying conditions. Am I not understanding this? Under Comorbidities

1 minute ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

So if there is a fire in a nursing home and the residents are too old to escape quickly, are you going to argue that the fire didn't kill them?

No, but if the governor set the fire I would probably call it murder.

40 minutes ago, Utebird said:

Got a link, a credible source???

Without one youre potentially spreading misinformation that could have adverse effects.

The 94.8 stat was all over the news this weekend and came from the CDC

1 minute ago, greend said:

No, but if the governor set the fire I would probably call it murder.

Please elaborate.

Just now, greend said:

No, but if the governor set the fire I would probably call it murder.

Yeah, I agree. It’s irresponsible for someone to say the fire is no big deal and only 1 or 2 people will get burnt and then we’d have the situation under control. 

6 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

So if there is a fire in a nursing home and the residents are too old to escape quickly, are you going to argue that the fire didn't kill them?

Smoke Inhalation? Yes smoke inhalation was cause of the fire but the fire did not kill them by burning them all up. LOL

Wait...............Did the Eagles set this fire or where there ex Eagles in the nursing home?

31 minutes ago, Utebird said:

I wouldnt expose any of those 4 named rookies to waiver. Each has shown promise and i think each 4 would be claimed. Keeping old declining talent over ypung developing talent is a recipe for disaster.

I was thinking the same. If you sign Fournette you have to cut a young talent who is making the minimum.

Not convinced he's worth that

Just now, Connecticut Eagle said:

Please elaborate.

https://www.wgal.com/article/u-s-department-of-justice-investigating-nursing-home-deaths/33820751

2 minutes ago, WentzFan11 said:

Yeah, I agree. It’s irresponsible for someone to say the fire is no big deal and only 1 or 2 people will get burnt and then we’d have the situation under control. 

I agree with that as well.

6 minutes ago, Cal said:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR2-muRM3tB3uBdbTrmKwH1NdaBx6PpZo2kxotNwkUXlnbZXCwSRP2OmqsI
 

what’s incorrect? Only 6% are COVID only deaths, all others died WITH covid with and average of 2.6 underlying conditions. Am I not understanding this? Under Comorbidities

The 6% are COVID only meaning that there were no other conditions. No obesity, no diabetes, no immunocompromised, etc.

If your are diabetic and died from a COVID infection you would not be categorized as COVID only. You still died from COVID, however.

2 minutes ago, Cal said:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR2-muRM3tB3uBdbTrmKwH1NdaBx6PpZo2kxotNwkUXlnbZXCwSRP2OmqsI
 

what’s incorrect? Only 6% are COVID only deaths, all others died WITH covid with and average of 2.6 underlying conditions. Am I not understanding this? Under Comorbidities

What have they been saying from the VERY beginning? Those with underlying health issues are at a greater risk. People with underlying health issues have been dying at a higher percentage than the 6% perfectly healthy people that died from COVID and all the "it's a hoax!"-ers are

While the majority of them probably have an underlying health issue and would have a listed comorbidity if they died today. 

28 minutes ago, Mrkingofspades said:

Fixed

Damn so that makes it worse lol. 

2 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

The 6% are COVID only meaning that there were no other conditions. No obesity, no diabetes, no immunocompromised, etc.

If your are diabetic and died from a COVID infection you would not be categorized as COVID only. You still died from COVID, however.

At some point, the line becomes very blurry between patients who die from a COVID infection with a comorbidity and patients who died from a comorbidity and happened to have COVID.  

I need the government to tell me to social distance and to wear a mask. If they don't tell me to do it, I can't be expected to read the news and decide for myself.