4 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Gravity is, in my opinion, one of the very worst movies that pretends to have any basis in actual science.

Regardless, the opening sequence is brilliant.

6 hours ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

I sometimes feel like I’m the only adult male who hates SciFi. Hate Star Trek. Hate Star Wars. Hate all of it.

Movies and books? You just mention movies. I enjoyed Heinlien, Asminov and Bradbury (believe it or not, Playboy turned me onto Bradbury) in my youth. Ender’s Game.

But Star Trek peaked for me it’s first season, then my Scout meetings were on the day it moved to and that was it. 2001 was pretty cool when it came out as was Clockwork Orange. Best Star Wars was the first movie. (Of course, we were stoned sitting in the first row so when the Star Cruiser went over, it was pretty cool). But it went downhill fast. Indiana Jones movies were fun. Best Sci Fi movie was Alien, by a landslide. BTW (spoiler alert), I would have spaced that cat at the end just to be safe.

3 hours ago, NCiggles said:

I thought Interstellar was made by some Hollywood guy who thinks he's smarter than he is. He read some article about black holes and time dilation without understanding either. The Marvel movies are just fluff. Sometimes they're entertaining. I am looking forward to the Hail Mary movie which is based on a book by the same guy that wrote The Martian. The Martian is a good sci fi movie.

Funny, I don’t think of The Martian as sci-fi.

2 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Trout's skills are still there, I mean, he's not AL MVP level anymore, but you can never question his Eagles' fandom.

How spellcheck turned Stout to Trout is beyond me. Big thumbs must have hit the r with the T, I guess. Great response.

3 hours ago, NCiggles said:

I thought Interstellar was made by some Hollywood guy who thinks he's smarter than he is. He read some article about black holes and time dilation without understanding either. The Marvel movies are just fluff. Sometimes they're entertaining. I am looking forward to the Hail Mary movie which is based on a book by the same guy that wrote The Martian. The Martian is a good sci fi movie.

Marvel movies are like mozzarella sticks. In the right setting when done right, they are great and no pretentious jackass can pretend otherwise. In the wrong setting and when put together sloppily, it's just greasy, sloppy, low brow garbage

On WIP this AM they were comparing Hurts to Mcnabb, debating who is the better QB.

I think the perfect parallel to those two is Brady vs. Manning. IMO, Manning...at his best...played the position at a more pure level with greater virtuosity than Brady. He also had a little less help (although they both had lots). But Brady was at his best when Manning was at his worst...on the biggest stage. And he got all the titles.

Hurts and Mcnabb are the same comparison. Mcnabb at his best was capable of doing more than Hurts and just played at a higher level. But Hurts can be trusted more in a SB than on a random Sunday at 1pm in October, whereas Mcnabb was the exact opposite. Hurts has been to 2 superbowls, won one, and been great in both. Mcnabb....well....

Unless you want to say that Manning was better than Brady, I don't see how you can argue that Mcnabb was better than hurts.

21 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Movies and books? You just mention movies. I enjoyed Heinlien, Asminov and Bradbury (believe it or not, Playboy turned me onto Bradbury) in my youth. Ender’s Game.

But Star Trek peaked for me it’s first season, then my Scout meetings were on the day it moved to and that was it. 2001 was pretty cool when it came out as was Clockwork Orange. Best Star Wars was the first movie. (Of course, we were stoned sitting in the first row so when the Star Cruiser went over, it was pretty cool). But it went downhill fast. Indiana Jones movies were fun. Best Sci Fi movie was Alien, by a landslide. BTW (spoiler alert), I would have spaced that cat at the end just to be safe.

I'm going to contradict myself because I postedt that I hate sci-fi movies, but seeing you mention books reminds me that I used to LOVE Tom Swift books when I was a kid. My dad had all of the original hard cover books that he'd let me read and then they relased a New Adventures of Tom Swift back in the 90s. I really got in to those.

3 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

On WIP this AM they were comparing Hurts to Mcnabb, debating who is the better QB.

I think the perfect parallel to those two is Brady vs. Manning. IMO, Manning...at his best...played the position at a more pure level with greater virtuosity than Brady. He also had a little less help (although they both had lots). But Brady was at his best when Manning was at his worst...on the biggest stage. And he got all the titles.

Hurts and Mcnabb are the same comparison. Mcnabb at his best was capable of doing more than Hurts and just played at a higher level. But Hurts can be trusted more in a SB than on a random Sunday at 1pm in October, whereas Mcnabb was the exact opposite. Hurts has been to 2 superbowls, won one, and been great in both. Mcnabb....well....

Unless you want to say that Manning was better than Brady, I don't see how you can argue that Mcnabb was better than hurts.

I think it boils down to stats vs wins. I saw a tweet today that talked about how the Eagles had the 29th ranked passing offense with 187.5 yards per game. With AJ Brown, DeVonta Smith and Dallas Goedert, averaging under 200 passing yards is unbelievable. The argument is that they had the 3rd ranked rushing offense thanks to Saquon Barkley. Donovan McNabb averaged roughly 240 yards passing per game. Clearly, passing yards per game don't make you the better quarterback, but it does McNabb the better statistical QB. He was also doing that with a less than stellar supporting cast.

welp.

and the next domino to fall. Our Defensive ends look like a bunch of WR with these numbers.

and it continues

Watching the second episode of the new season of Quarterbacks on Netflix and the stupid person in charge kf the music and sound in the stadium motivated Cousins to the win with a Tom Petty song.

7 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

and it continues

I liked 93 better for Powell-Ryland.

Uche is going to bring to 0 exactly what Huff did

Just now, LeanMeanGM said:

I liked 93 better for Powell-Ryland.

Uche is going to bring to 0 exactly what Huff did

APR and Ojulari both have their college numbers now. I liked 93 too.

2 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

APR and Ojulari both have their college numbers now. I liked 93 too.

52 is just such a bad Eagles number. It’s nothing but jobbers through history. Barry Gardner was probably the best to wear it.

I hate 13 for Ojulari. Should've been Dotson's number, who chose 2 which is awful for a WR. Could Dotson be even worse in year two??? The number suggests definitely yes. 0 is apropos for Uche because he plays a lot like Huff. Bad against the run, all speed rush.

10 hours ago, RememberTheKoy said:

Nick Foles

1 hour ago, just relax said:

Regardless, the opening sequence is brilliant.

I would disagree, but I won't bore folks with what I don't like about it.

4 hours ago, RememberTheKoy said:

It will likely be a better book than a movie just as The Martian was a better book than a movie.

I've heard the books are crap. Especially the book that's going to be based on the new movie

3 hours ago, Diehardfan said:

Pretty sure he can't go back to CF but what a crap show that organization has become

I should probably just google it but I'm lazy. So is he doing this just because of specific language that he'd void all of his guarantees if he were to get into legal trouble?

20 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

52 is just such a bad Eagles number. It’s nothing but jobbers through history. Barry Gardner was probably the best to wear it.

Jason Short was a fun ST demon to watch.

8 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

On WIP this AM they were comparing Hurts to Mcnabb, debating who is the better QB.

I think the perfect parallel to those two is Brady vs. Manning. IMO, Manning...at his best...played the position at a more pure level with greater virtuosity than Brady. He also had a little less help (although they both had lots). But Brady was at his best when Manning was at his worst...on the biggest stage. And he got all the titles.

Hurts and Mcnabb are the same comparison. Mcnabb at his best was capable of doing more than Hurts and just played at a higher level. But Hurts can be trusted more in a SB than on a random Sunday at 1pm in October, whereas Mcnabb was the exact opposite. Hurts has been to 2 superbowls, won one, and been great in both. Mcnabb....well....

Unless you want to say that Manning was better than Brady, I don't see how you can argue that Mcnabb was better than hurts.

Comparisons are tricky because there are aspects of all positions. Manning was one of the best at understanding where everyone was on the field and reading that as the play developed. Brady was good at reading the play, but even better at reading the receiver and putting the ball in the right place. His placement was the best I have seen. That’s the problem with comparisons. Same position, different GOAT level technique.

Let’s take AJ and Devonta. I am not sure I have ever seen better late hands and body language than AJ. Last time I saw a step turn like Devonta was Marvin SR (who was still better than Devonta by a hair). Different skillsets but similar results. With AJ you get "stupid little DB, thinks you’ll outmuscle me with a fraction of a second warning”, with Devonta you get "stupid DB, think you can turn with me”. Same position, different exceptional technique.

Hurts and Barkley win Espy for play of the year

1 minute ago, RememberTheKoy said:

Hurts and Barkley win Espy for play of the year

Hurts and Barkley...

5 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Comparisons are tricky because there are aspects of all positions. Manning was one of the best at understanding where everyone was on the field and reading that as the play developed. Brady was good at reading the play, but even better at reading the receiver and putting the ball in the right place. His placement was the best I have seen. That’s the problem with comparisons. Same position, different GOAT level technique.

Let’s take AJ and Devonta. I am not sure I have ever seen better late hands and body language than AJ. Last time I saw a step turn like Devonta was Marvin SR (who was still better than Devonta by a hair). Different skillsets but similar results. With AJ you get "stupid little DB, thinks you’ll outmuscle me with a fraction of a second warning”, with Devonta you get "stupid DB, think you can turn with me”. Same position, different exceptional technique.

I think Brady and Peyton would have excelled at coaching if they had gone that route