4 hours ago, eglz1 said:

I doubt he had much choice. Kind of like Doug but Sirianni made a different choice.  Another way to look at it is how many head coaches are de facto Offensive Coordinators (Andy Reid) or Defensive Coordinators (Belichick) and succeed at it. Some do, I suspect more don't. It's just that last year's coordinators were SO BAD and on D the change was from bad to worse.

Oh 100% bud! Sirianni did what he had to do to keep his job. And I think he’ll have to accept that if things go well he isn’t going to get a lot of praise… But that if things go well he’s going to keep his job and ultimately that probably is all he wants? Speculation of course as we don’t know.

On 3/28/2024 at 10:50 AM, eagle45 said:

Fair question, but I’d say we need a lot of transition in order to be a very different team than the one that collapsed last season.

That team still won ten games. It feels like this is a team filled with mercenaries even in the coaching staff. I hope it all works out, but there are a lot of moving parts here.

On 3/28/2024 at 4:37 AM, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Yeah I know what you mean and I do have some sympathy for him… But if things go well then he’ll remain in position as HC and isn’t that what it’s all about for him? I think it’s why he accepted all of the changes so that he could remain HC.

And ironically the team is back to square one, because one has to think if Moore turns this into a top five let’s say NFC Championship level offense he will get coaching offers.

I completely forgot this guy was on the roster. So much for the post-signing hype.

5 hours ago, Kz! said:

I completely forgot this guy was on the roster. So much for the post-signing hype.

I don't think he's a bad player or this was a bad signing. But since that time, we have added a lot of competition. He missed his best opportunity here by a year. 

6 hours ago, brkmsn said:

I don't think he's a bad player or this was a bad signing. But since that time, we have added a lot of competition. He missed his best opportunity here by a year. 

Completely agree! When we signed him I thought it was a good addition and a player who was going to get quite a lot of playing time. Then they cut Maddox and I thought maybe he’ll be the starter. But they’ve added DeJean and they’ve played Mitchell in the slot and they brought back Maddox. So at this point he’s probably not going to make the roster but the logic was there at the time.

18 hours ago, brkmsn said:

I don't think he's a bad player or this was a bad signing. But since that time, we have added a lot of competition. He missed his best opportunity here by a year. 

Bad player? Who knows? Bad signing? Nah. When he signed, secondary was a huge weakness, and he's only here on a one year deal. I don't think a signing like that can be considered "bad." I just thought the hype mostly coming from that Raiders beat writer was pretty funny considering what we got him for. "A 25 year old that's great in coverage, is an awesome tackler, and an amazing blitzer!" Just seemed silly to me at the time.

Tyler Hall, we hardly knew ya

On 3/22/2024 at 12:34 AM, T-1000 said:

Totally agreed. This is exactly why the Eagles had to sign Patrick Robinson so early in free agency to a big money deal for the SB year.

Can we get a Patrick Robinson check?