10 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

True. Though there is the argument about him having a stacked team during those SBs

Does Wilson get credit or does the LoB

SB 1 for Hurts: D wasn't stacked, RBs were Sanders and Scott. Reason Sanders had his best pro season was due to Hurts, not the other way around. The Eagles D gave up 24 2nd half points. 17 in the 4th qtr. A stacked D doesn't do that. That was a very good team, obviously, but certainly not stacked.

2 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

SB 1 for Hurts: D wasn't stacked, RBs were Sanders and Scott. Reason Sanders had his best pro season was due to Hurts, not the other way around. The Eagles D gave up 24 2nd half points. 17 in the 4th qtr. A stacked D doesn't do that. That was a very good team, obviously, but certainly not stacked.

The defensive line was pretty well stacked… After watching last year’s Super Bowl, it’s pretty easy for me to think that the Eagles would’ve won two of the last three Super Bowls had that first one been played on turf.

I know there’s nothing to be done about it… "If ifs and buts, etc”. But that first Super Bowl was just too close and the field was that bad.

3 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

SB 1 for Hurts: D wasn't stacked, RBs were Sanders and Scott. Reason Sanders had his best pro season was due to Hurts, not the other way around. The Eagles D gave up 24 2nd half points. 17 in the 4th qtr. A stacked D doesn't do that. That was a very good team, obviously, but certainly not stacked.

He had a top Oline and top weapons in both games

We were 27-21 going into the 4th for the first one

He's had talent around him and that'll likely always get brought up like it does with many other QBs in history

20 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I think there is some diamond in the rough international talent out there like Jordan Mailata was but not enough to support a new competitive team. And it really boils down to QB's. There's a lot of bad QB play in the NFL as is. I don't think there is any undiscovered generational talent that would be able to pick up the position and develop into a true player at the position if he hasn't grown up doing it like most of the QB's do.

I think its becoming easier for QBs honestly. I wont get in to why... But looking outward you can probably look at teams being willing to draft Anthony Richardson in the 1st round as evidence also.

12 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

I think its becoming easier for QBs honestly. I wont get in to why... But looking outward you can probably look at teams being willing to draft Anthony Richardson in the 1st round as evidence also.

Is that due to being easy or desperation?

13 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

He had a top Oline and top weapons in both games

We were 27-21 going into the 4th for the first one

He's had talent around him and that'll likely always get brought up like it does with many other QBs in history

Exactly, he did his job, but that stacked D gave up 17 4th qtr points. Name a team that won the SB that didn't have one of the better if not the best roster the season they won the SB? This talk about stacked roster is ridiculous. The reason Dallas won 3/4 in the 90s is because of a stacked roster, SF in the 80s had stacked rosters, really good teams have really good players, which is why they are really good. Joe Burrow doesn't have stacked rosters, Herbert doesn't have stacked rosters, Jackson doesn't have stacked rosters, which is why they don't win SBs.

Teams this ast season that had rosters that rivaled the Eagles: MN and Detroit. Both losers.

6 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Is that due to being easy or desperation?

It seems that coaches feel they can tailor an offense to a limited skillset where athleticism is superior to traditional QB skills and football IQ.

Just now, HazletonEagle said:

It seems that coaches feel they can tailor an offense to a limited skillset where athleticism is superior to traditional QB skills and football IQ.

I would also say this extends to WR as well. Where we have begun seeing so many rookie WRs have insanely good rookie years. And often times, those WRs were unpolished in college without full NFL route trees running much more simplistic offenses. That used to suggest a steeper learning curve. But no more.

2 hours ago, BigEFly said:

Spags could be talking about Mahomes as much as he is talking about Hurts. Both can hurt teams with their legs.

Both can hurt teams with their legs but they do it in different ways. Mahomes extends plays. Hurts runs.

2 hours ago, Mike030270 said:

I've seen it. What's it got to do with the discussion though?

Obviously nothing.

13 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Is that due to being easy or desperation?

Definitely desperation. Teams are still not building the foundation first. Too many GMs trying to keep their job for that year instead of trying to look toward the future

The league would probably look different if teams had to keep a GM for at least 2 years before firing him

10 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

Exactly, he did his job, but that stacked D gave up 17 4th qtr points. Name a team that won the SB that didn't have one of the better if not the best roster the season they won the SB? This talk about stacked roster is ridiculous. The reason Dallas won 3/4 in the 90s is because of a stacked roster, SF in the 80s had stacked rosters, really good teams have really good players, which is why they are really good. Joe Burrow doesn't have stacked rosters, Herbert doesn't have stacked rosters, Jackson doesn't have stacked rosters, which is why they don't win SBs.

Teams this ast season that had rosters that rivaled the Eagles: MN and Detroit. Both losers.

I never said he didn't do his job. That's the problem when these discussions happen. If you're not praising Hurts then you're hating him

Dak had a stacked roster a few years ago with I think 9 all pros and didn't get to the promised land

Hurts had a stacked roster for 2024 and won the SB

The 2024 Eagles had 2 1st team all-pro selections (Barkley and Baun) and 4 2nd team all pros (Brown, Mailata, L. Johnson and Carter); 6 total all pros. The 2022 Eagles had exactly the same -- 2 1st team (Kelce and Lane) and 4 second team (Hurts, AJ, Reddick and Bradberry). So obviously very strong rosters, but...

The 2023 Cowboys had 9 all pros -- 4 1st team all pros (Zack Martin, CeeDee Lamb, DaRon Bland, and Brandon Aubrey) and 5 2nd team all pros (Dak Prescott, Tyron Smith, Tyler Smith, Micah Parsons, and Bryan Anger). And Dak got bounced in the Wild Card.

The 2024 Ravens had 6 all pros, 4 on the 1st team (Lamar Jackson, Roquan Smith, Marlon Humphrey, and Patrick Ricard) and Henry and Hamilton on the 2nd team, and got bounced in the division round.

The 1993 Cowboys had 7 all pros for context.

Did Hurts play with a great roster? Yes. Was it historically, or abnormally great? No. And if you want to kill Hurts for winning with this roster, then you should really go after Dak and Lamar for their failures with equal or better rosters.

58 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

SB 1 for Hurts: D wasn't stacked, RBs were Sanders and Scott. Reason Sanders had his best pro season was due to Hurts, not the other way around. The Eagles D gave up 24 2nd half points. 17 in the 4th qtr. A stacked D doesn't do that. That was a very good team, obviously, but certainly not stacked.

I think the field and and coaching were more of an issue than the talent. If they had played that game on a reasonable surface the Eagles would have smoked the Chiefs.

6 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Did Hurts play with a great roster? Yes. Was it historically, or abnormally great? No. And if you want to kill Hurts for winning with this roster, then you should really go after Dak and Lamar for their failures with equal or better rosters.

Like I said... people get sensitive about it

9 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

I think the field and and coaching were more of an issue than the talent. If they had played that game on a reasonable surface the Eagles would have smoked the Chiefs.

Don’t think your conclusion matches your premise. They probably win, but Gannon’s defense wasn’t smoking any QB worth a damn.

Pointing out facts = being sensitive. Makes sense...

I was skeptical of Hurts -- hated the pick, thought Minshew was a better option in 2021. But at some point you have to give up on your pre-conceived notions and allow new information to inform your opinion. Jalen Hurts is a top 5-8 QB in this league. I'd clearly take the big 4 over him (Mahomes, Allen, Burrow and Lamar), but I'm not sure there's anyone else I'd trade him for straight up for the 2025 season. At this point, he is the best QB in the conference.

There are 2 primary reasons he gets dumped on by talking heads -- first, his style isn't aesthetically pleasing. But the much bigger issue is TV clowns (Simms, Orlovsky, Daniel) simply will never let go of their initial view that he wasn't an NFL QB. So they will seize on any opportunity to diminish his accomplishments and accentuate his failures so they can desperately avoid admitting they were wrong.

3 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Pointing out facts = being sensitive. Makes sense...

I was skeptical of Hurts -- hated the pick, thought Minshew was a better option in 2021. But at some point you have to give up on your pre-conceived notions and allow new information to inform your opinion. Jalen Hurts is a top 5-8 QB in this league. I'd clearly take the big 4 over him (Mahomes, Allen, Burrow and Lamar), but I'm not sure there's anyone else I'd trade him for straight up for the 2025 season. At this point, he is the best QB in the conference.

There are 2 primary reasons he gets dumped on by talking heads -- first, his style isn't aesthetically pleasing. But the much bigger issue is TV clowns (Simms, Orlovsky, Daniel) simply will never let go of their initial view that he wasn't an NFL QB. So they will seize on any opportunity to diminish his accomplishments and accentuate his failures so they can desperately avoid admitting they were wrong.

I'm going to assume you didn't see the post directly above yours saying to go after Dak that literally goes after Dak then

4 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

There are 2 primary reasons he gets dumped on by talking heads -- first, his style isn't aesthetically pleasing. But the much bigger issue is TV clowns (Simms, Orlovsky, Daniel) simply will never let go of their initial view that he wasn't an NFL QB. So they will seize on any opportunity to diminish his accomplishments and accentuate his failures so they can desperately avoid admitting they were wrong.

this.

also, was somebody saying the '22 defense wasn't stacked ?

What's the move for the Sixers at pick 3? You making a trade and if so for who or who you drafting?

11 minutes ago, garingovt2000 said:

What's the move for the Sixers at pick 3? You making a trade and if so for who or who you drafting?

1. Trade down

2. Draft Ace at 3

In that order.

I don't like the idea of trading up, and I don't like the idea of trading for a vet.

20 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

1. Trade down

2. Draft Ace at 3

In that order.

I don't like the idea of trading up, and I don't like the idea of trading for a vet.

Saw Zion and Herb Jones for #3 and PG ... What do you think of that one?

2 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I think there is some diamond in the rough international talent out there like Jordan Mailata was but not enough to support a new competitive team. And it really boils down to QB's. There's a lot of bad QB play in the NFL as is. I don't think there is any undiscovered generational talent that would be able to pick up the position and develop into a true player at the position if he hasn't grown up doing it like most of the QB's do.

Oooh, I think there could be, they just are in Central America and play baseball right now. Some of those arms could definitely be QBs with generational arm talent, but their country just doesn't even pay attention to American Football