1 hour 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.

This is what many struggle with…myself included. Though I think I’m improving a bit as I get older.

Hurts gradually won me over with his work ethic…and then I started to actually believe he meant what he said about ‘winning…no matter how it looks’. When you watched football for about five decades, you’ve heard that many times before… A lot of the time it is just lip service. But no…this dude is built differently… He really is locked in. He’s certainly not the most talented guy to ever hit the field… but I’d take his mindset/work ethic over just about anybody’s.

34 minutes ago, twistr said:

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

They might have the arm but I don't know if they would pick up the other fundamentals or mental aspect of playing QB. Like you said, their country doesn't pay much attention to American Football. I would have a hard time seeing someone get invested enough in the sport to put in the time, commitment and work for something that probably isn't all that inspiring to them.

6 hours ago, just relax said:

I saw an interview with Spagnuolo in which he spoke of the toughest offenses to defend against. This is an excerpt from the transcript. The interview is available on YouTube, IIRC.

"We just felt like going into the game that we had to somehow not allow them to be two dimensional, because I've been there, you can't defend them. They get the run going, and then [Hurts is] throwing the ball, and he gets out of the pocket. I did think we did a fairly good job of that...But to the credit to the quarterback, the rest of those guys that were playing on offense, they made some key throws, and I thought Jalen did a great job really in critical situations of beating us or getting first downs with his feet. 

"I thought that was really, really challenging, and that's what happens in this league nowadays with these athletic quarterbacks. I mean, you can take away runs, you can cover really well, have them all covered, and when they say 'Hey, I'm gonna get the first down with my feet,' and they're able to do it because your lanes are out of whack or something happens, then it becomes challenging. I give them a lot of credit for what they did."

Here it is, starting at the 7:45 point in the video:

4 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Absolutely not.

Have a team move if anything. There isn't enough talent to support 32 teams as is.

I’m not specifically for it, but I completely (and respectfully) disagree with your second sentence. The number of outstanding players on the 32 Practice Squads is substantial … more than substantial. 32 times 16 is 512 players. That is almost 10 rosters. Sure there are some positions that are less robust on the Practice Squads than others, but overall we have talent in abundance.

To put that concept to the test. Think about the third string players in the Eagles training camp. What would their W-L record be in the SEC if they played there this season?

4 hours ago, Mike030270 said:

That's an interesting argument since Goodell's long term goal is a global league. One would think they'd be able to get more talent but there's also just the possibility that it'd get watered down instead

It will absolutely get watered down.

4 hours 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 will go to my grave believing that well over 90% of the reason behind your bolded point was Gannon, and less than 10% the players.

Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

It will absolutely get watered down.

How does "watered down” manifest itself? The SEC and the Big10 are watered down versions of the NFL. Is that meaningful in terms of the entertainment value of their games?

13 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I’m not specifically for it, but I completely (and respectfully) disagree with your second sentence. The number of outstanding players on the 32 Practice Squads is substantial … more than substantial. 32 times 16 is 512 players. That is almost 10 rosters. Sure there are some positions that are less robust on the Practice Squads than others, but overall we have talent in abundance.

To put that concept to the test. Think about the third string players in the Eagles training camp. What would their W-L record be in the SEC if they played there this season?

But the roster and possibly the PS will need to expand for what the owners really seek, 18 regular season games.

4 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.

That right there is the biggest factor.

Just now, BigEFly said:

But the roster and possibly the PS will need to expand for what the owners really seek, 18 regular season games.

Okay, let’s run some numbers on that. For every roster addition you steal 32 players from the Practice Squad pool. 512 minus 32 is 480 minus 32 is 388 minus 32 is 356. So raising the rosters to 56 leaves 356. That is more than six teams worth of players.

Plus, if you look at how Howie has manipulated the Practice Squad in recent years, the pool of players isn’t really 16 per team, but rather 20 or more.

Again, I’m not saying I’m for it, but a shortage of talented players isn’t a serious impediment in my opinion.

5 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

That right there is the biggest factor.

I agree.

Ironically, with that said, we do appear to be in a rich period of QB talent currently.

27 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I’m not specifically for it, but I completely (and respectfully) disagree with your second sentence. The number of outstanding players on the 32 Practice Squads is substantial … more than substantial. 32 times 16 is 512 players. That is almost 10 rosters. Sure there are some positions that are less robust on the Practice Squads than others, but overall we have talent in abundance.

To put that concept to the test. Think about the third string players in the Eagles training camp. What would their W-L record be in the SEC if they played there this season?

You are comparing 18-22 year olds to grown men.

5 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I agree.

Ironically, with that said, we do appear to be in a rich period of QB talent currently.

And Daniel Jones is still in the league, maybe claiming a starting role over the top 5 QB pick from 2 years ago. Aaron Rodgers can still write his own ticket. And Russell Wilson has passed to his 3rd team in 3 years. The Browns have 5 QBs on their roster... and still no player for the position.

Where do you see evidence of a rich period?

PS player teams would probably be the definition of watered down football. I think @LeanMeanGM laid out the best counter argument to Goodell's global league. There's just not enough top talent for it to exist

I'm curious how Goodell thinks it'll work out. Hopefully he won't just ignore the limited talent pool

36 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I’m not specifically for it, but I completely (and respectfully) disagree with your second sentence. The number of outstanding players on the 32 Practice Squads is substantial … more than substantial. 32 times 16 is 512 players. That is almost 10 rosters. Sure there are some positions that are less robust on the Practice Squads than others, but overall we have talent in abundance.

To put that concept to the test. Think about the third string players in the Eagles training camp. What would their W-L record be in the SEC if they played there this season?

That’s not talent in abundance that is at a level to create a team and have it be competitive week in and week out. We have this entire pool of talent you just mentioned and yet every week under the current setup there are a handful of games that are either just bad football and some is just unwatchable. Thinning out the talent pool just to create more teams would only magnify that.

I mean they already tried your method in essence with the XFL and USFL as these teams are generally PS players during the season. Both leagues put out bad product.

50 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I’m not specifically for it, but I completely (and respectfully) disagree with your second sentence. The number of outstanding players on the 32 Practice Squads is substantial … more than substantial. 32 times 16 is 512 players. That is almost 10 rosters. Sure there are some positions that are less robust on the Practice Squads than others, but overall we have talent in abundance.

To put that concept to the test. Think about the third string players in the Eagles training camp. What would their W-L record be in the SEC if they played there this season?

Also, another way to frame it is there are 512 players not talented enough to take the spot of one of 1,696 current players on an NFL roster. In addition, you are hiring 10 or so GM’s not good enough or talented enough to hold the position of 32 current GM’s. Same applies to HC. There is the possibility some may be good to competent at their job but overall I’d think the odds would be against them.

Expansion also trickles down. More HC’s would be filled with more OC’s and DC’s who would then be filled with someone else who may or not be qualified. You would be refilling your PS with guys not good enough to be on the original PS which makes them less useful to develop or fill in in the event of injury.

8 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Also, another way to frame it is there are 512 players not talented enough to take the spot of one of 1,696 current players on an NFL roster. In addition, you are hiring 10 or so GM’s not good enough or talented enough to hold the position of 32 current GM’s. Same applies to HC. There is the possibility some may be good to competent at their job but overall I’d think the odds would be against them.

Expansion also trickles down. More HC’s would be filled with more OC’s and DC’s who would then be filled with someone else who may or not be qualified. You would be refilling your PS with guys not good enough to be on the original PS which makes them less useful to develop or fill in in the event of injury.

Nightmare football

1 hour ago, mattwill said:

How does "watered down” manifest itself? The SEC and the Big10 are watered down versions of the NFL. Is that meaningful in terms of the entertainment value of their games?

They are watered down versions but the biggest factor you aren’t considering is level of competition. The games have entertainment value because the competition level is equal. The Eagles PS would beat most college teams because one is college and one is a part of the 1.6% percent of all college players that make it to the pro level. It wouldn’t be good entertainment to see the best of college players playing against regular college players.

Same applies to the NFL. The 2024 Eagles lost 3 games against the best of the pro’s. You could take the 53 best PS players around the league, put them on one team and then watch them get smoked by the Eagles.

3 hours ago, garingovt2000 said:

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

its a hell no. you need the pick from them too.

2 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

You are comparing 18-22 year olds to grown men.

How does their age affect the entertainment value of the product they deliver?

1 hour ago, Iggles_Phan said:

And Daniel Jones is still in the league, maybe claiming a starting role over the top 5 QB pick from 2 years ago. Aaron Rodgers can still write his own ticket. And Russell Wilson has passed to his 3rd team in 3 years. The Browns have 5 QBs on their roster... and still no player for the position.

Where do you see evidence of a rich period?

Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Hurts, Stafford, Jackson. Compare those six to the top six of prior eras. I look at richness by assessing the cream rather than the skim milk.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

That’s not talent in abundance that is at a level to create a team and have it be competitive week in and week out. We have this entire pool of talent you just mentioned and yet every week under the current setup there are a handful of games that are either just bad football and some is just unwatchable. Thinning out the talent pool just to create more teams would only magnify that.

I mean they already tried your method in essence with the XFL and USFL as these teams are generally PS players during the season. Both leagues put out bad product.

The quality of product is subjective. When I was in college there were 22 teams. Now there are 32. Was the product in the 70s better than the current product? Is the current product watered down?

My personal answers to those questions is No and No.

If the 2024 Eagles played the Vermeil Super Bowl Eagles 10 times, how many of the 10 would each team win?

Players today are bigger, more athletic, and better prepared than prior era players were.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Also, another way to frame it is there are 512 players not talented enough to take the spot of one of 1,696 current players on an NFL roster. In addition, you are hiring 10 or so GM’s not good enough or talented enough to hold the position of 32 current GM’s. Same applies to HC. There is the possibility some may be good to competent at their job but overall I’d think the odds would be against them.

Expansion also trickles down. More HC’s would be filled with more OC’s and DC’s who would then be filled with someone else who may or not be qualified. You would be refilling your PS with guys not good enough to be on the original PS which makes them less useful to develop or fill in in the event of injury.

The flip side of your pessimism is that opportunity produces better preparation of the talent pool.

2 minutes ago, mattwill said:

The flip side of your pessimism is that opportunity produces better preparation of the talent pool.

I don’t think that is pessimism at all. It’s reality. If the players were good enough they would be on a team, not on a PS.

8 minutes ago, mattwill said:

The quality of product is subjective. When I was in college there were 22 teams. Now there are 32. Was the product in the 70s better than the current product? Is the current product watered down?

My personal answers to those questions is No and No.

If the 2024 Eagles played the Vermeil Super Bowl Eagles 10 times, how many of the 10 would each team win?

Players today are bigger, more athletic, and better prepared than prior era players were.

I wasn’t alive in the 70’s to know.

I also don’t think it’s an apples to apples comparison to compare something 50 years ago to today. If they dissolved the Titans and Patriots and redistributed those players to the remaining 30 teams you don’t think each team gets better? If each team gets better, you don’t think that improves quality?

The 2024 Eagles would win all 10, comfortably. You explained why in your last sentence.