10 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

It was the team's call. But I would have put Mailata out there. He has played in preseason games and has been in the system for three years. Driscoll made several mistakes that led to free rushers crashing into our qb that Mailata probably wouldn't have made. Plus, Mailata is far, far better in the run game.

Yes the guy who’s never played a regular season snap or football til 3 years Ago and was massively struggling in training camp wouldn’t have made some of those with more and more plays exposing his inexperience and adjustments by the defense. So you call people out for making assumptions but then you make the ultimate assumption
 

and what proof do you have he’s better in the run game? Mailata has never played besides 15 snaps. We are basing that off preseason? Great JJAW should start at wr since preseason is an indicator. 

15 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

You are basing your evaluation off of reports from beat writers, several of whom have been calling for Mailata to get cut for three years. Clearly they didn't want to be wrong about him, so they wrote what they wrote.

But whatever. Keep cheering against the guy. maybe you will be right someday. But today ain't your day.

I’m not Against him. I want him to succeed. Because It helps the Eagles. But yes it was clearly just the beat writers. That’s why the Eagles decided to start Driscoll over him  I guess the Eagles coaches didn’t watch training camp either and just went based off the beat writers. lol. 
 

I am basing my decision on the fact the Eagles trusted Driscoll more to start him based off what they saw at training camp. Meanwhile mailata had multiple years of experience over Driscoll in the system and with working with stoutland and yet the Eagles still trusted Driscoll as a rookie in a covid off season to start over him  Driscoll was learning multiple positions not just tackle

4 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

It was the team's call. But I would have put Mailata out there. He has played in preseason games and has been in the system for three years. Driscoll made several mistakes that led to free rushers crashing into our qb that Mailata probably wouldn't have made. Plus, Mailata is far, far better in the run game.

"Probably" is an assumption.  And how can you say Mailata is far, far better (that's 2 fars!) in the run game when we hardly ran the ball?

You may not be wrong that Mailata turns out better than Driscoll, but your are drawing a conclusion after the fact, looking at the result, and not based on what the coaches had available to them at the time of the decision.

6 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

You are basing your evaluation off of reports from beat writers, several of whom have been calling for Mailata to get cut for three years. Clearly they didn't want to be wrong about him, so they wrote what they wrote.

But whatever. Keep cheering against the guy. maybe you will be right someday. But today ain't your day.

Yes, I’m sure the reporters banded together in solidarity to protect their very important training camp reports. Then the team obliged by starting Driscoll over him and moving Peters to LT. 

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Yes, I’m sure the reporters banded together in solidarity to protect their very important training camp reports. Then the team obliged by starting Driscoll over him and moving Peters to LT. 

You left out not targeting JJAW.

That was funny. 

1 minute ago, ManuManu said:

Yes, I’m sure the reporters banded together in solidarity to protect their very important training camp reports. Then the team obliged by starting Driscoll over him and moving Peters to LT. 

Reporters do that all the time. The way they reported from camp, Driscoll was fantastic and Mailata was horrible.

As far as the team, I don't know why they made the decision they did. But I do know that starting Driscoll was probably the safer play because, if he was terrible, the media wasn't going to be as rough on them.

Had they started Mailata and he had made the mistakes Driscoll had made, I am sure the reaction from the beat writers would have been completely different.

2 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Reporters do that all the time. The way they reported from camp, Driscoll was fantastic and Mailata was horrible.

As far as the team, I don't know why they made the decision they did. But I do know that starting Driscoll was probably the safer play because, if he was terrible, the media wasn't going to be as rough on them.

Had they started Mailata and he had made the mistakes Driscoll had made, I am sure the reaction from the beat writers would have been completely different.

It might have something to do with the bolded. It’s possible the coaches and reporters saw the same thing. 

5 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Reporters do that all the time. The way they reported from camp, Driscoll was fantastic and Mailata was horrible.

As far as the team, I don't know why they made the decision they did. But I do know that starting Driscoll was probably the safer play because, if he was terrible, the media wasn't going to be as rough on them.

Had they started Mailata and he had made the mistakes Driscoll had made, I am sure the reaction from the beat writers would have been completely different.

Yes the eagles clearly make decisions on what the media thinks and says. Hence why they chose hurts. Cause every media member was praising that pick and the eagles.  

Doug: I’m gonna run a trick play on fourth down in the Super Bowl. 

Also Doug: I’m going to start Driscoll because I’m scared the media will be mean to me if Mailata struggles. 

C’mon, JSB. Let’s be real. They saw Driscoll as the better player. We don’t need to twist ourselves into a pretzel over the decision. 

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

Yes the eagles clearly make decisions on what the media thinks and says. Hence why they chose hurts. Cause every media member was praising that pick and the eagles.  

Yeah, that was probably a better example. 

I actually was a fan of driscoll coming out of school , as a swing tackle. 

How about we give him a chance ?

Doug Pederson had a guard rotation in 2017...then let Wiz settle in when they won.
A SB winning coach is not going to care about what the public thinks.

I'm curious what they do at Oline. Doug also needs to have Wentz move around otherwise he may get killed

Can we take a few weeks to collect ourselves before we face Donald?

27 minutes ago, greend said:

This gave me a bit of a pause

 

• Jalen Reagor’s 55-yard catch from Wentz was the second-longest ever by an Eagle in his first NFL game. Bryce Treggs of all people caught a 58-yarder from Wentz against the Giants in 2016. Treggs had only seven more career receptions.

He overthrew Reagor on the second time I think. He kind of overthrew Jackson but it was also on the other side of the field and Jackson had to run over there as well

 

WTH is going on with Matt Pryor? Is he injured?? In the dog house for some reason??? Something must be going on.

6 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Doug: I’m gonna run a trick play on fourth down in the Super Bowl. 

Also Doug: I’m going to start Driscoll because I’m scared the media will be mean to me if Mailata struggles. 

C’mon, JSB. Let’s be real. They saw Driscoll as the better player. We don’t need to twist ourselves into a pretzel over the decision. 

Yeah, that was probably a better example. 

It’s obvious what the eagles Saw in training camp was that Driscoll was better than mailata. It’s why they trusted him to start over mailata. if mailata looked better in camp they would’ve started him cause it’s better for the team. 

as for mailata’s 15 snaps, no one said he was bad or didn’t look solid. However Driscoll at the start of the game was actually solid. It’s as the game went on, redskins adjusted and used his inexperience and flaws against him. It’s why 15 plays (18 but 3 were 10 points with 29 seconds left) isn’t enough cause at some point rivera and del rio are going to make an adjustment with mailata and at that point mailata might have had the same struggles Driscoll did since both are inexperienced. 

1 minute ago, ManuManu said:

 

Good, it was much better watching the games without a damn flag every play!

 

7 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

Here is where I suspect that there may have been an effort by the league, knowing how the OLs would be behind the DLs in preparedness, to protect the QBs and raise the bar on holding. 

I feel like people are forgetting Mailata's lack of football experience. He only just learned to play the sport a few years ago

1 minute ago, Mike030270 said:

I feel like people are forgetting Mailata's lack of football experience. He only just learned to play the sport a few years ago

And missed most of two seasons with injuries. 

Im not surprised if Peters was bad. He came out of retirement. And then practiced at guard on the opposite side of the line until right before the season started.

Hes obviously going to need to work off some rust. 

He will be fine. He was fine last year Not his HOF in his prime self but fine. He will get beat occasionally, but he will be ok.

 

If he can settle in, Lane returns, and Driscoll can play RG we could be set with our line for the remainder of the season. 

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

It’s obvious what the eagles Saw in training camp was that Driscoll was better than mailata. It’s why they trusted him to start over mailata. if mailata looked better in camp they would’ve started him cause it’s better for the team. 

Well, now they know that he isn't.

1 hour ago, bpac55 said:

Pretty sure the Eagles had some amazing defensive performances against Barry Sanders when he was unstoppable and they shut him down with seriously bad numbers.

Yes - although Sanders was prone to losing yards so I don't know if the Eagles were the only team to hold him in check. 

1 hour ago, RLC said:

Grain of salt of course, given the source.

OBJ for Alshon? *WIP Caller Voice*

Some people want them to trade Wentz for OBJ. 

Tank get Lawrence or Fields, trade Ertz, trade Cox, rebuild quick Arizona style.