18 hours ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Player safety. Spectator safety.

There may not have been any so far, but we should be proactive and prevent the inevitable ones.

I wholeheartedly endorse reciprocal pettiness. Whether it be banning the Lambeau Leap, banning the Chiefs chant, introducing rules about player safety in playing in temps over 100F etc to reduce the competitive advantage the Bucs and Fins, have. The Cowboys and Lions being mandated to play away on a Thursday night. Etc

After all. The NFL constantly talks about parity.

5 hours ago, Diehardfan said:

Not only that - as long as the offensive line can lineup and go very low - the way they have been during the rush push, good chance Hurts will get the 1st down regardless - by himself.

If you notice nearly half (or more) of the past sneaks - Hurts would have made it by his own power.

I’m not worried about it, tbh.

In other news, How about those Phillies -

1st place in division

Tied with the Dodgers for the best record in National League

And Schwarber’s 466 foot moonshot ball for his 300th HR may have not landed yet.

40 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Under the current proposal, divisions are essentially meaningless already. The NFL needs to stop breaking the game.

I disagree. Divisions foster rivalries. Would we hate Dallas half as much if we only saw them once every three years?

Just now, just relax said:

I disagree. Divisions foster rivalries. Would we hate Dallas half as much if we only saw them once every three years?

I'll take "F Yes" for $1,000 Alex

31 minutes ago, just relax said:

I disagree. Divisions foster rivalries. Would we hate Dallas half as much if we only saw them once every three years?

We would for a little while, but within a generation it would dissipate. Historically, had we only played the Boys once every 3-4 years there would be no rivalry.

11 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

We would for a little while, but within a generation it would dissipate. Historically, had we only played the Boys once every 3-4 years there would be no rivalry.

Yup. Division rivalries are fun. Getting rid of them is silly. Sure we still have rivalries with teams after big wins/losses/fights etc but they fade after a few years (does anyone really care about the state of the Saints or the Vikings anymore?).

12 hours ago, mattwill said:

I foresee his stats blowing up once the refs start calling holds

12 hours ago, mattwill said:

In those situations what does the OC do?

How many of those situations are there?

Support the HC in every capacity. It's good to have multiple viewpoints

Not sure how many teams still do it but we won our first SB with that situation

2 hours ago, just relax said:

You're not going to get the best candidates for that position if they are not allowed to call plays. Also, why does it have to be the OC. Why not the DC? Finally, while it has been done that way for many years it is not the only way it's been done.

Yes you will. It's a stepping stone position for HC

DC? Now you're just throwing crap to the wall

Of course it's not the only way. I never said it was. Go back and check my posts. You're arguing something I never was to begin with

From Zangaro

Here’s a look at the contract details of this nine-man UDFA class, via OverTheCap:

Maxen Hook, DB, Toledo

Total guarantee: $200,000
Signing bonus: $30,000

Montrell Johnson Jr., RB, Florida

Total guarantee: $200,000
Signing bonus: $25,000

Hollin Pierce, OL, Rutgers

Total guarantee: $180,000
Signing bonus: $30,000

B.J. Mayes, DB, Texas A&M

Total guarantee: $175,000
Signing bonus: $25,000

Brandon Johnson, DB, Oregon

Total guarantee: $170,000
Signing bonus: $20,000

Darius Cooper, WR, Tarleton State

Total guarantee: $90,000
Signing bonus: $15,000

ShunDerrick Powell, RB, Central Arkansas

Total guarantee: $76,500
Signing bonus: $13,500

Lance Dixon, LB, Toledo

Total guarantee: $35,000
Signing bonus: $17,500

Taylor Morin, WR, Wake Forest

Total guarantee: $12,500
Signing bonus: $5,000

This year, the Eagles gave out $181,000 in signing bonuses and over $1.1 million in guaranteed money to the nine-man class, according to OverTheCap. That guarantee figure is actually down from the six-man class in 2024:

2025: $1,139,000 (9 players)
2024: $1,351,103 (6 players)
2023: $918,000 (9 players)
2022: $1,747,000 (12 players)
2021: $480,000 (7 players)
2020: $764,000 (13 players)

All of these UDFA contracts are standard three-year deals that come with base salaries of $840,000 in Year 1, $1.005 million in Year 2 and $1.12 million in Year 3. If any of these UDFAs plays out this initial contract, they’d become restricted free agents after the 2027 season.

If this BS rule passes then I hope officials start calling the neutral zone infractions that they have legalized for defenses when they line up against the Eagles tush push/QB sneak. Something tells me they won't though amd the NFL will continue to allow that from defenses when the Eagles run a QB sneak.

34 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

This year, the Eagles gave out $181,000 in signing bonuses and over $1.1 million in guaranteed money to the nine-man class, according to OverTheCap. That guarantee figure is actually down from the six-man class in 2024:

2025: $1,139,000 (9 players)
2024: $1,351,103 (6 players)
2023: $918,000 (9 players)
2022: $1,747,000 (12 players)
2021: $480,000 (7 players)
2020: $764,000 (13 players)

All of these UDFA contracts are standard three-year deals that come with base salaries of $840,000 in Year 1, $1.005 million in Year 2 and $1.12 million in Year 3. If any of these UDFAs plays out this initial contract, they’d become restricted free agents after the 2027 season.

Yup. Lurie is broke.

At this point I hope it gets banned, and the Eagles STILL convert QB sneak at a high rate, and the rest of the league gets called for all the pushing of players that happens at the 1st down and goal lines and they hate what they voted for...all because 1 team does a play well.

Also the Eagles media should be posting highlights of all the other teams failing at the push play, and players pushing RBs and WRs in other plays with that Siri quote "If other teams could do it they would!"

54 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I foresee his stats blowing up once the refs start calling holds

Support the HC in every capacity. It's good to have multiple viewpoints

Not sure how many teams still do it but we won our first SB with that situation

Yes you will. It's a stepping stone position for HC

DC? Now you're just throwing crap to the wall

Of course it's not the only way. I never said it was. Go back and check my posts. You're arguing something I never was to begin with

Not crap at all. It had struck me that there are a lot of DCs who are only DCs and seem content with that - Fangio, Spagnuolo, JJ, etc. and fewer DCs than OCs go on to become head coaches. Some have, of course, Tom Landry comes to mind, but fewer. Fangio was a HC but briefly and seems much happier as a DC.

3 hours ago, UK Eagle said:

I wholeheartedly endorse reciprocal pettiness. Whether it be banning the Lambeau Leap, banning the Chiefs chant, introducing rules about player safety in playing in temps over 100F etc to reduce the competitive advantage the Bucs and Fins, have. The Cowboys and Lions being mandated to play away on a Thursday night. Etc

After all. The NFL constantly talks about parity.

This is gold, send it to the Novacare Complex

The Lambeau Leap is outright dangerous. We should never have players jumping into the stands. Major liability

Really wasn't expecting the whining from Packers. Actually liked that team and would usually root for them if we were eliminated

This... changes things for me

9 hours ago, Diehardfan said:

Or

Laughable. Acting like there aren’t a bunch of politics behind the scenes to get it banned.

15 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

NFL can do a playoff lottery. Keep the seeding process the same, the #1 seed gets the most lottery balls down to the #7 seed who gets the least. The winner of the lottery becomes the new #1 seed and they get to pick their opponent or pick a bye if they want. Keep doing the process till the seeds are set. Then we can do a double or nothing rule where the teams that lose get to pick another losing team to face. The winner gets back in there playoffs while the loser is permanently eliminated and then faces a punishment of playing in the probowl. Meanwhile, one team from both divisions gets a golden power of veto. Whoever scores the most points in a year. They can use that power only once to skip facing a team they don’t want to play. Or they can use it on another team who would also skip to the next round. The strategy here would be to use it on a bad team if you are confident you will win your game, you get the lesser team the next week. Then the week before the Super Bowl, America gets to vote and bring back one team From each conference who then plays each other. The winner of that game gets to re-enter the playoffs.

You forgot to log in as Wallyhorse

3 hours ago, just relax said:

I disagree. Divisions foster rivalries. Would we hate Dallas half as much if we only saw them once every three years?

I'm not sure you understood my point. In the current construction of the league and playoffs, divisions are huge. HOWEVER, the proposal to seed according to record only and disregard division winners is a massive restructure that makes divisions almost meaningless... and Sack's suggestion that they wouldn't even be guaranteed a playoff spot would just destroy it entirely.

The NFL wants to destroy itself, it seems.

The value of the tush push for the Eagles was the time used up by opponents' DC trying to figure out how to stop it. The more time they were wasting worrying about 4th and 1, the less time they had to gameplan for what the Eagles were likely to do on their 5, 10, and 15-yard plays.

From 2013-2022, the data below shows the NFL success rate on 4th and 1 at 65.5%.

Whether the Eagles use the tush push or not, their short yardage conversion rate will be much higher with the personnel they have.

What are the chances of converting on 4th down?

Generally speaking, the chances a team converts on a fourth down are better than most people would think. NFL teams convert on fourth down 51 percent of the time when they go for it, according to play-by-play data from 2013-22 from nflverse, making it a near coin flip.

There are plenty of factors that contribute to this. A plurality of the attempts have been from within a yard, which has a whopping success rate of 65.4 percent. Taking out those attempts, fourth downs are converted only 41.6 percent of the time, still a solid rate in its own right.

4th down conversion rate by distance

For the most part, as teams get farther from the first-down marker, it becomes more difficult for them to convert. There are a few exceptions in the data going back to 2013, largely due to smaller sample sizes where a longer distance has a higher success rate. However, there is a clear point at which it becomes significantly more difficult to convert.

Based on data going back to 2013, teams have had a success rate of 39.4 percent going for it on fourth-and-8. If teams wanted to try for it on fourth-and-9, that success rate dips a whopping 9.8 percent down to 29.6 percent.

There are still gaps near the top. It is more than 8 percent more difficult to convert on fourth-and-2 than it is to convert on fourth-and-1, and it is another 9.8 percent gap between fourth-and-3 and fourth-and-2. But at a certain point, successful conversions happen fewer than 25 percent of the time.

Distance (Yards)	Conv-Att (Percent)
1	1,500-2,291 (65.5%)
2	429-750 (57.2%)
3	231-487 (47.4%)
4	196-422 (46.4%)
5	158-358 (44.1%)
6	121-281 (43.1%)
7	83-193 (43%)
8	54-137 (39.4%)
9	37-125 (29.6%)
10	93-335 (27.8%)
11	24-88 (27.3%)
12	20-64 (31.2%)
13	12-54 (22.2%)
14	12-57 (21.1%)
15	14-64 (21.9%)
15+	32-230 (13.9%)

The current rule proposal only reseeds at the Division Round. The Wild Card round would be the same.

The proposal is the second playoff-related initiative introduced this year. In advance of the league meeting in March, the Detroit Lions proposed reformatting the playoffs by basing home-field advantage strictly on record. However, there was hesitance among owners to strip division champions of their first-round home-field advantage, prompting the modification to reseed after the wild-card round. Under the new proposal, teams would be reseeded based strictly on record for the divisional round, regardless of whether a team won its division or made the playoffs as a wild card.

10 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

The current rule proposal only reseeds at the Division Round. The Wild Card round would be the same.

The proposal is the second playoff-related initiative introduced this year. In advance of the league meeting in March, the Detroit Lions proposed reformatting the playoffs by basing home-field advantage strictly on record. However, there was hesitance among owners to strip division champions of their first-round home-field advantage, prompting the modification to reseed after the wild-card round. Under the new proposal, teams would be reseeded based strictly on record for the divisional round, regardless of whether a team won its division or made the playoffs as a wild card.

I actually dislike this more than completely changing it or just keeping it the same. Because now if you have 2 upsets in the divisional round the team with a better record is going to get the home playoff game. But you already told me the team with a better record doesn’t matter in the wildcard round to get the home playoff game. So if the team that winds up having to go on the road for the NFC championship game won their division and the other was a wild card and met two rounds earlier, the road team would’ve had a home playoff game cause winning the division mattered. Meanwhile two rounds later winning the division didn’t really matter for a bigger nfc title game.

14 hours ago, mattwill said:

Given how far the entertainment value of the NBA has descended, I have to wonder if women’s basketball isn’t more entertaining than men’s basketball.

If you're just talking strictly drama or reality TV type stuff then yeah that's the WNBA. I like a little hatred between teams or players as long as there is a respect there. All the stuff between Reese and Clark is tiring and played out. I'm sick of hearing about it. I know it's not their faults that their fanbases and the media blow everything out of proportion.

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

I actually dislike this more than completely changing it or just keeping it the same. Because now if you have 2 upsets in the divisional round the team with a better record is going to get the home playoff game. But you already told me the team with a better record doesn’t matter in the wildcard round to get the home playoff game. So if the team that winds up having to go on the road for the NFC championship game won their division and the other was a wild card and met two rounds earlier, they would’ve had a home playoff game cause winning the division matter. Meanwhile two rounds later winning the division doesn’t matter.

It's ridiculous. So the Eagles, who play the toughest out-of-division schedule this season, can likely win the division with a 12-5 record and by all statistical metrics still be considered to be the best team in the league. But will possibly travel to a road NFCCG against a 13-4 wildcard team?

There will never be a perfect process. The current one is no worse than any other option.