2 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

That's all fine and dandy but the point with the Ravens is that they ALSO have a massive rushing attack.  The 49ers were another team over the last few years that have based much of their success on rushing.  I think the trend of increased importance on running the ball is a league wide item and Lurie/Howie will take notice.

 

I'm not saying it will be exactly the same.  What I'm saying is that I believe it is "run first" again as the plan next year even though the numbers are very likely to shift a bit toward more passing.  Injuries or massive drop off can always mean the plan needs to change.  Nothing new there.  As for Barkley, yeah he comes back to earth but I don't think we get a massive drop off due to wear and tear.  He is a unique specimen physically and he also hasn't really accumulated the normal wear and tear given his number of years due to how many games he has missed.  I think he has another couple of years of elite RB play.

I'm not talking about a specific number of touches for Barkley.  My bet is that the backup RBs get more touches next year but overall I still see it as a run heavy O.  2026 can very well be back to the old Lurie/Howie formula with massive passing but then we won't have Hurts as the QB.

The counter to the niners is they were 4th in the league in passing last year when they got to the Super Bowl. Again like the ravens, the statistics showed that they were one of the best passing teams in the league as well as one of the best running teams. You can’t say that about the eagles right now. They have an elite run game and their pass game is not close to where the niners and ravens were/are statistically

Just to point out the last 5 Super Bowl champions have had at least a top 10 passing attack. None of them have had a rushing attack that’s finished top half of the league. Chiefs were 4th in pass and 22 in rushing. Bucs were 4th in passing and 25th in rushing. Rams were 5th in pass and 27th in rushing. Chiefs 1st in passing and 20th in rushing. Chiefs 6th in passing and 17th in rushing. If the ravens, bills or Lions win the Super Bowl a rushing attack in the top 10 would’ve won but also the passing attack once again would be top 10. If the eagles win it would be the outlier of the last 6 champions where they had a passing attack outside of the top 10 and a rushing attack that was top 10. 

went and looked this up the last time a team won a Super Bowl with a passing offense that was outside the top 10 was in 2015 with the broncos  (were top 10 rushing). So if the eagles do this they would be clearly be an outlier.  

With Saquon Barkley he’s already had two seasons where he’s had this many touches in a season. Each time the following year he didn’t stayed healthy throughout the entire season. He could be the physical specimen that he is, but he’s already shown in his career even with being a physical specimen that this type of workload has got him the next season. Why I think they get themselves a good backup cause they know they can’t just lean on saquon as much as they did this year expecting him to just hold up with 750+ touches over two years 

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

The counter to the niners is they were 4th in the league in passing last year when they got to the Super Bowl. Again like the ravens, the statistics showed that they were one of the best passing teams in the league as well as one of the best running teams. You can’t say that about the eagles right now. They have an elite run game and their pass game is not close to where the niners and ravens were/are statistically

You are missing the point here.  Yes, passing remains important but you also get an increase in importance on the rushing attack.  The philosophy change is from "we can be bottom 10 in rushing and top 8 in passing and win a SB" to "we need to be top 10 in both" to have the best chance to win.  I know the Eagles don't have that mix this year so they are the outlier as you say should they move on and win.

There are realistically 5 teams that can win the SB.  4 of those are in the top 10 rushing.  Only the Chiefs are outside the top 10 rushing.  Only 3 are in the top 10 passing.  Maybe this is a one off year but it does feel like there is a shift underway.

1 hour ago, Mike31mt said:

Why do people want Hurts throwing more contested catches?  That's going to help the offense?  You sure??

 

Also, I'm still holding out hope that Huff delivers his Golden Tate moment in the playoffs and makes it all worth it. 

He played one snap last week lol.....that's enough to make a play but I'm not getting my hopes up.......a strip sack on Stafford would be nice in the 4th quarter on Sunday though. 

1 hour ago, DrPhilly said:

You are missing the point here.  Yes, passing remains important but you also get an increase in importance on the rushing attack.  The philosophy change is from "we can be bottom 10 in rushing and top 8 in passing and win a SB" to "we need to be top 10 in both" to have the best chance to win.  I know the Eagles don't have that mix this year so they are the outlier as you say should they move on and win.

There are realistically 5 teams that can win the SB.  4 of those are in the top 10 rushing.  Only the Chiefs are outside the top 10 rushing.  Only 3 are in the top 10 passing.  Maybe this is a one off year but it does feel like there is a shift underway.

I don’t know if you saw my point i edited because I went back and did the research cause I didn’t know it. The last team that was outside the top 10 in passing offense that won a Super Bowl was the 2013-2015 with ravens, Seahawks and broncos. So about a decade since it’s happen  

So essentially over a decade worth of Super Bowl champions where they didn’t necessarily have to have a great rushing attack (last 5 champions really haven’t been) but they all were a top tier passing team that Denver, Seattle and ravens about 10 years ago. 

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

I don’t know if you saw my point because I went back and did the research cause I didn’t know it. The last team that was outside the top 10 in passing offense that won a Super Bowl was the 2012 ravens.

Again, you can go back and look at all of my posts here.  I'm not talking about the passing attack.  I agree with you that passing will remain important.  I'm talking about an increase in importance of the rushing attack.  Can you address that point specifically please?

 

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

Frankly for the long term I don’t think you can bank on having this type of historic running game in 2025. There’s only been 9 seasons in the history of the NFL where a RB rushed for 2000 yards. For the Eagles to be as good as they’ve been and passing game is the same in 2025 then Barkley is going to have to be about this good next year. 

This is not true.  There is an entire offseason before then.   AND, if the Eagles are smart and pro-active, they can get ahead of the prediction you are making and get a REAL RB2 to help carry the burden and we can have the same level of effectiveness with the running game, but do it with a duo of backs rather than only one being the bell cow.  They could go with the Thunder and Lightning style that the Eagles ran with Ricky Watters and Charlie Garner back in the late 90s.  They combined for 1850 yards rushing in 1995.  That's not a 2k yard season, but it is much much better than the drop off that normally happens with the 2k rushing team the following year.  The harder part is finding that complementary guy to pair with Barkley.  With both PSU backs going back to school, that position takes a significant hit in the depth of the draft.  Maybe they can bring in Skattebo.  I really liked what I saw from him during the college playoff.  Tough, physical runner who really wants it.  Good type of guy to have around.

 

The real question I have regarding the drop off in rushing attack is more about the impact on the OL.  There's no question that that much running impacts the OL as well, and I wonder if they are as effective the following year themselves.   This is a relatively young OL, so that might be less of an issue.  Johnson may be the one with the greatest delta in his game, Mailata is right in the prime of his career... but the other 3 are all just entering the prime, so they should be ok, unless there is something to the cumulative effect from year to year.   

And that said, I would actually be ok with a little bit softer offseason and training camp...  and more smoothies!!!

2 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

 

Here is the link below.  Look to the columns in pink on the far right.  You can select whether you want to see cap implications based on both timing and also cut/trade.  I'm assuming they have factored the options into the numbers based on the timing.  In the screenshot I've selected the cut option in the post-June 1 period.

https://overthecap.com/player/jalen-hurts/8793

 

From what I gleaned yesterday, the bonuses being discussed are regarding guarantees to the SALARY, which means that they are not PAID on the day that they hit, so trading any time up until the start of the regular season should give the Eagles the cap savings and the new team would pick up those hits.   Its a pretty nice way of setting it up so that the contract is movable without massive salary cap implications, if I am understanding it correctly, though I admit, I likely don't.

17 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Again, you can go back and look at all of my posts here.  I'm not talking about the passing attack.  I agree with you that passing will remain important.  I'm talking about an increase in importance of the rushing attack.  Can you address that point specifically please?

 

I don’t think there is an increase importance in rushing attack specifically to the ravens or the lions. The last 5 years the ravens had a top 5 rushing attack. They didn’t win big in the playoffs and fell short. Everyone on here blamed it on Lamar and their passing game. Their passing game didn’t finish in the top 10 once in the previous 4 years (in fact they were bottom 1/3 3 of the previous 4 years). If they manage to win it this year it’s the first time where passing offense has caught up to their ability to run the ball. I’d argue their was an increase importance to be able to pass the ball.

as for the lions, the last three seasons have shown that their passing offense and their rushing offense has been very similar. So I don’t think there was any increase in importance to the lions. Do i think Goff needs a rushing attack to help him succeed at the highest level? I do but i think that for every Qb not named mahomes, lamar, josh allen and burrow. 

 

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

I don’t think there is an increase importance in rushing attack specifically to the ravens or the lions. The last 5 years the ravens had a top 5 rushing attack. They didn’t win big in the playoffs and fell short. Everyone on here blamed it on Lamar and their passing game. Their passing game didn’t finish in the top 10 once in the previous 4 years (in fact they were bottom 1/3 3 of the previous 4 years). If they manage to win it this year it’s the first time where passing offense has caught up to their ability to run the ball. I’d argue their was an increase importance to be able to pass the ball.

as for the lions, the last three seasons have shown that their passing offense and their rushing offense has been very similar. So I don’t think there was any increase in importance to the lions. Do i think Goff needs a rushing attack to help him succeed at the highest level? I do but i think that for every Qb not named mahomes, lamar, josh allen and burrow. 

 

The increase would be in the need for a rushing game in the NFL (that can include the QB) and the increase is over the last 5 or 6 years.

See Lions, Ravens, Eagles, 49ers, Bills.  5 of the 8 remaining teams this year are top 10 in rushing and 4 of the 5 realistic SB contenders.

Save for the Chiefs, nearly all the other top teams the last three years (Lions, Eagles, Ravens, Bills, 49ers) have all had top rushing attacks.

16 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

This is not true.  There is an entire offseason before then.   AND, if the Eagles are smart and pro-active, they can get ahead of the prediction you are making and get a REAL RB2 to help carry the burden and we can have the same level of effectiveness with the running game, but do it with a duo of backs rather than only one being the bell cow.  They could go with the Thunder and Lightning style that the Eagles ran with Ricky Watters and Charlie Garner back in the late 90s.  They combined for 1850 yards rushing in 1995.  That's not a 2k yard season, but it is much much better than the drop off that normally happens with the 2k rushing team the following year.  The harder part is finding that complementary guy to pair with Barkley.  With both PSU backs going back to school, that position takes a significant hit in the depth of the draft.  Maybe they can bring in Skattebo.  I really liked what I saw from him during the college playoff.  Tough, physical runner who really wants it.  Good type of guy to have around.

 

The real question I have regarding the drop off in rushing attack is more about the impact on the OL.  There's no question that that much running impacts the OL as well, and I wonder if they are as effective the following year themselves.   This is a relatively young OL, so that might be less of an issue.  Johnson may be the one with the greatest delta in his game, Mailata is right in the prime of his career... but the other 3 are all just entering the prime, so they should be ok, unless there is something to the cumulative effect from year to year.   

And that said, I would actually be ok with a little bit softer offseason and training camp...  and more smoothies!!!

OK, let me rephrase this if you’re passing game does not improve and your running attack (Barkley and whoever) is very likely going to have to do what it did this year to make up for that passing attack.

let me just point this out again every time in Saquon Barkley’s career that he has had 300 carries/touches or more in a season the following year he’s gotten banged up and missed time. I would say he also was less efficient frankly I think that’s more of a giant thing than it was a saquon thing.

14 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

What I am saying is that we don't know what he is yet.  Moving on from Hurts for him, or even contemplating at this point is way way too soon.

But how will we know with him sitting on the bench? It's irritated me going back to at least McNabb that the Eagles won't put the backup in a game to play some in-game snaps. We know that some people are "workout warriors". They look great in practice, not great in a real game. Playing in a game that has already been decided isn't as good as in a competitive game but IMO it's better than set piece practice.

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

I don’t think there is an increase importance in rushing attack specifically to the ravens or the lions. The last 5 years the ravens had a top 5 rushing attack. They didn’t win big in the playoffs and fell short. Everyone on here blamed it on Lamar and their passing game. Their passing game didn’t finish in the top 10 once in the previous 4 years (in fact they were bottom 1/3 3 of the previous 4 years). If they manage to win it this year it’s the first time where passing offense has caught up to their ability to run the ball. I’d argue their was an increase importance to be able to pass the ball.

 

This would be the first season with Lamar that they had a RB like Henry. They are not a pass-first team that opens up the run. It is the opposite. 

3 minutes ago, eglz1 said:

But how will we know with him sitting on the bench? It's irritated me going back to at least McNabb that the Eagles won't put the backup in a game to play some in-game snaps. We know that some people are "workout warriors". They look great in practice, not great in a real game. Playing in a game that has already been decided isn't as good as in a competitive game but IMO it's better than set piece practice.

The backup to Hurts was Pickett and he did get those opportunities this season. 

VanSummeren is going to probably need to focus on LB this summer as Dean wont be ready and BVS seems to have a chance at being a nice LB who may win the job.

So here is a FB prospect to potentially draft.

 

Just now, brkmsn said:

The backup to Hurts was Pickett and he did get those opportunities this season. 

Wasn't that because Hurts was hurt? Of course the backup is going to come in in those situations. I was referring to when the starter was healthy but the game was decided.

Just now, eglz1 said:

Wasn't that because Hurts was hurt? Of course the backup is going to come in in those situations. I was referring to when the starter was healthy but the game was decided.

PIckett came in a couple of 4th quarters with the lead. We hardly passed. 

48 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

You are missing the point here.  Yes, passing remains important but you also get an increase in importance on the rushing attack.  The philosophy change is from "we can be bottom 10 in rushing and top 8 in passing and win a SB" to "we need to be top 10 in both" to have the best chance to win.  I know the Eagles don't have that mix this year so they are the outlier as you say should they move on and win.

There are realistically 5 teams that can win the SB.  4 of those are in the top 10 rushing.  Only the Chiefs are outside the top 10 rushing.  Only 3 are in the top 10 passing.  Maybe this is a one off year but it does feel like there is a shift underway.

I think the league will swing more to 'balanced' attacks rather than skewing to one or the other.

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

WE DID IT!!!

 

10 years sure. But 2005 Redskins over Bucs was  

 

TL;DR: Stop treating Mark Brunell with kid gloves!!!!!

21 hours ago, mattwill said:

According to Spotrac $85 million is insured.  I miss Lynch too. 

This article is an excellent breakdown of his contract fwiw

11 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I think the league will swing more to 'balanced' attacks rather than skewing to one or the other.

Yep, that's exactly what I'm thinking is underway.  More importance overall for rushing then we've seen over the last 20 years.  Not skewed to rushing like the Eagles have become but rather more of a balance.  For the Eagles though, it is going to be rushing first as long as Hurts is the QB.

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

OK, let me rephrase this if you’re passing game does not improve and your running attack (Barkley and whoever) is very likely going to have to do what it did this year to make up for that passing attack.

let me just point this out again every time in Saquon Barkley’s career that he has had 300 carries/touches or more in a season the following year he’s gotten banged up and missed time. I would say he also was less efficient frankly I think that’s more of a giant thing than it was a saquon thing.

My post wasn't about the passing game at all, it was specific to the running game being able to maintain its current level of dominance by adding a complementary back (which seem to be highly affordable these days, especially compared to WRs and QBs).  

And, the reason to bring in the complementary back is to try to avoid the injury to Barkley from happening in the first place, or at least having a piece in place to allow you to mitigate it without a massive overhaul to the philosophy.  I don't trust Gainwell in that role, and since he's a free agent anyway... they can upgrade that position any way they wish, either through free agency, the draft or both.

 

Looking at the free agent pool for this year, there's obviously no one close to Barkley or Henry available this year... but there are some intriguing names if the Eagles wanted to really lean in to the running game hard this offseason.  JK Dobbins, Najee Harris and AJ Dillon are all available depending on what the Eagles are looking for.  And then there's obviously the draft... where there's a number of intriguing backs.

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

Just to point out the last 5 Super Bowl champions

The problem with this approach is self-limiting sample size when you've got a generational QB in the data set. For a stretch of years during the Reid era, the justification used for his inability to draft a top-end WR was that the last 5 super bowl winners did not have one and thus that's the best and/or only way to build a super bowl roster. What it neglects is that the QB who won 3 of them was Tom Brady who doesn't need a WR of that caliber to win a ring and the other 2 had elite defenses. Point is, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

1 hour ago, Mike31mt said:

Why do people want Hurts throwing more contested catches?  That's going to help the offense?  You sure??

 

Also, I'm still holding out hope that Huff delivers his Golden Tate moment in the playoffs and makes it all worth it. 

Football is a game that boils down to personnel matchups and making adjustments.  Maybe the Rams are fine allowing Saquon Barkley to run for 255 yards again and account for 302 yards of offense.  I’d bet against that.  I would also bet they’re not going to run their base defense and just hope Barkley won’t torch them again.  The Rams will have to bring extra defenders to the LOS.  I can guarantee their defensive game plan will be to make Hurts beat them through the air with his arm.

There are only 11 players allowed on defense.  The Rams, based off of the first matchup, cannot stop the Eagles using 6 players to play the run.  They will commit more, which means single coverage on Brown, Smith, Goedert, and Dotson,

The Eagles should (and hopefully will) start the game with a heavy dose of Barkley.  That will force the Rams to declare what their defensive adjustments are.  The Eagles have to attack the areas those adjustments leave open.  
 

Maybe the Eagles will win 3 more games and the Super Bowl just by dominating teams in the run game and allowing 10 points per game.  I think they’ll need to do more.  The passing game will need to contribute more, and teams game planning to slow down Barkley should allow lots of 1-on-1 opportunities for Hurts and the WRs.  Hurts will have to deliver for the Eagles to advance.

27 minutes ago, eglz1 said:

But how will we know with him sitting on the bench? It's irritated me going back to at least McNabb that the Eagles won't put the backup in a game to play some in-game snaps. We know that some people are "workout warriors". They look great in practice, not great in a real game. Playing in a game that has already been decided isn't as good as in a competitive game but IMO it's better than set piece practice.

I hear ya.  We won't, unless he's the #2, and then when Hurts misses time as he inevitably will, we'll get to see glimpses.  QB is the toughest spot to evaluate, because the starter plays every snap pretty much as long as they possibly can.  So, there's very limited opportunity to see it.   But, I've heard it said about McKee that the defense has really benefited from him running the scout team and them having to prepare to face him constantly.   That might mean something.   But, the love affair with the back up QB continues in Philadelphia.  As you say, we don't really know that much about McKee, but there are multiple people on this board who are convinced that he's a capable starting QB in the NFL.  That seems massively premature.  

 

That said, I'd be 100% on board moving Pickett this offseason and riding with McKee as the #2 for 2025, and looking to bring in yet another developmental QB in the later rounds of the draft this offseason.

Just realizing, if the Rams beat us and the Lions hold their ground, the Stafford lead Rams go to Detroit. With the storyline of the fires and Stafford going back to Detroit in the championship game, I could see the NFL higher ups pushing them. Hopefully I'm overthinking.