2 minutes ago, greend said:

Very good point and it could be but he's likely making it worse and costing us games in the mean time. 

Sure, but I didn’t say it was a smart decision. 😆

2 minutes ago, EagleJoe8 said:

Sure, but I didn’t say it was a smart decision. 😆

So besides Doug being dumb......................

3 minutes ago, greend said:

So besides Doug being dumb......................

Yeah, pretty much. 

1 hour ago, Arsenal79 said:

Lol no.  Any coach foolish enough to stick "all his eggs in the Wentz basket” will be fired within two years.

NFL coaches aren’t green tinted glasses wearing TATEr homers.  This thread is the last place in the world you can still find people who believe in Carson Pyrite lol.

2 years ago Carr was where Wentz is today.

And then along came Gruden

1 hour ago, Bacarty2 said:

We know you're an uber Wentz hater, and like I mentioned before, I think I know why. 

With that being said, the same "alpha" mentality that makes a coach a coach, is the same mentality that makes Wentz the hands down, guaranteed starter day 1. 

Every coach sees an MVP candidate that they can become the hero if they fix him. 

*IF* Doug gets fired, Hurts is gone and the coach is putting all his eggs in the Wentz basket. **AND** if said coach gets rid of JP, has a ton of designed roll outs and sticks with the run game this team will be just fine. 

I have no idea what you're talking about.  Everything you say here is some sort of made up fantasy.  

If the Eagles were smart, this is what they would do, imo:

- Bench Wentz for his own sake.  Maybe if he took a few games off, it could help.  Helped with McNabb in 2008.

- Once Wentz is benched, the team can see if the problem really is the coaching/scheme, especially if Hurts/the offense has the same issues. 

 

That's all.  And go from there.  

14 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

Doug threw the ball 40 times against the best pass defense in the league against the Redskins, while the run was working. BA would never(thats 1 win)

doug fubard that Bengals game from top to bottom, including playing for a 50+ yards field to win. Thats win #2) 

Doug ran out of 2 point conversion plays (something BA would never do)

Thats 3 wins, easy, off the top of my head

Ridiculous.  Every game is different, and the circumstances would have been entirely different with BA as coach.  He would have made a few better decisions, and maybe wins an additional game at most.

BA isn't out there throwing the ball for Wentz inside of 3 seconds, blocking or tackling anyone or getting open and catching the ball.  The players have the most to do with how a team performs.  The Eagles are what they are because they haven't brought in much new young talent at all, and have drafted worse than any other team in the league since 2014.  That's a long time to be totally inept in the draft, and the bills are now all due.  It's time for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy re-organization and a new management team.

If you are expecting a new coach to come in with this group and make everything better, you are in for a let down.  Especially so if the same personnel group is allowed to make the choices again and possibly have influence on the selection of the next head coach and staff.

16 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

Doug threw the ball 40 times against the best pass defense in the league against the Redskins, while the run was working. BA would never(thats 1 win)

doug fubard that Bengals game from top to bottom, including playing for a 50+ yards field to win. Thats win #2) 

Doug ran out of 2 point conversion plays (something BA would never do)

Thats 3 wins, easy, off the top of my head

Would Arians go pass on two point conversions with Wentz playing like he is, it's all about context.

Bruce Arians had Jameis Winston throw a historic interception laden season last year, there's no way he turns round Wentz issues or this teams record.

33 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

Yep, you dont watch football

Desgined roll out and outside the pocket are quite literally 2 different things. 

Wentz is 14 for 22 for 2 touchdowns on designed roll outs. Per Dan Orl

So a 63% completion rate which is still lower than his normal. Also the 2 touchdowns came within the 10 yards line. What you posted does not help your argument at all.

 

36 minutes ago, greend said:

So besides Doug being dumb can anyone explain to me why on Sunday when the run is clearly working we move away from it? 

Because teams adjust and shut it down each game.

We aren't a good running team, we're a team that runs good in spurts, but the OL simply hasn't been good enough, run blocking requires more continuity than pass blocking b/c it's like a ballet, we did a good job trap blocking against the Browns, but not power runs.

As far as Peters v Mailata, people forget Peters outplayed Mailata before the Cleveland game, was it a bad game for him or a sign that he can't keep it up at his age and is better used off the bench - one trend that is obvious is they overrate declining veterans like Peters and Jeffrey and overpay them - and Ertz presents the same issue, though the cap will keep them from overpaying him next season in an extension. It's one thing to patch with veterans with low cost, short-term contracts (the Patriot way), quite another to commit most of your cap to over 30 players on long-term, big dead money deals. Howie used to be smart, don't know what happened to him.

As far as drafting Taylor in the late 3rd, it's easy to draft competent but limited LBs, we have two in Edwards and Singleton, it's harder to find above average LBs after the first 50 picks or so, Taylor was a bet on upside, Bradley is more your athletic late rd pick who starts on STs and hopefully develops over a few years. Problem wasn't those picks, it was the lack of talent in front of them, these are the kinds of players you marinate for a couple years - but blame Hicks, if he was durable, he's be the MLB and solidify the group. You pay anchor players, not guys who spend half the season on IR each year.

When so many players go elsewhere and have success, there is a coaching issue, either they can't coach up players, or they don't know how to work with the scouts to identify the type of player who is a good fit to their schemes - because if so many draft picks succeed elsewhere, the problem isn't drafting talent, but the right talent.

They need to fire Pederson b/c with the cap issues the team has to be blown up next year, at this point I have to hope they don't limp into the playoffs, get blown out and pick #19 or so. If I blow the team up, I want an innovative young HC like AR in 1999 to guide the team forward, with a coaching staff that can teach and develop young players. I think Pederson is a good players' coach that keeps a team on an even keel - they don't quit on him - but is more comfortable with veterans.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, greend said:

Well now I won't be able to sleep at night knowing that.

Peter King is an idiot.   So, that means Wentz should not be benched.

2 hours ago, greend said:

On the old board years ago it got annoying literally every tater would use that on anyone that was remotely positive about the team during the Reid era. Now there really isn't a reason on the new boards.

 

47 minutes ago, MillerTime said:

Ill concede that it does happen. Outside of Kirk Cousins and Jimmy Garropolo it has a less that 50% success rate though. Not exactly the answer.

I do love made up numbers, but only 75% of the time.

10 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

Flip the script on that... and it's hard to play offense on an exceedingly long field.   WARD!!!!

35 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

2 years ago Carr was where Wentz is today.

And then along came Gruden

No he wasn’t.  Carr had a 94 QB rating two years ago.  The Raiders were bad in spite of him, whereas the Eagles are awful primarily BECAUSE of the incompetence of Carson Wentz.

But I understand as DENIAL is one of the primary stages of grief.

1 hour ago, greend said:

So besides Doug being dumb can anyone explain to me why on Sunday when the run is clearly working we move away from it? 

Is this a trick question?

33 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

Why?

3 years ago he had votes for MVP, and sh!t, last year is Lamar didnt have a crazy year he probably could of gotten MVP votes. 

That’s great.  When the team is trash in 2021 and 2022 the new coach can save his job by saying it’s not my fault, Carson got MVP votes in 2017! 🤣🤣🤣

56 minutes ago, EagleJoe8 said:

I think part of it is Doug being hellbent on trying to get Wentz to pass his way out of the funk he’s in. 

Keep firing.

7 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

No he wasn’t.  Carr had a 94 QB rating two years ago.  The Raiders were bad in spite of him, whereas the Eagles are awful primarily BECAUSE of the incompetence of Carson Wentz.

But I understand as DENIAL is one of the primary stages of grief.

2 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

That’s great.  When the team is trash in 2021 and 2022 the new coach can save his job by saying it’s not my fault, Carson got MVP votes in 2017! 🤣🤣🤣

"He was almost MVP 3 years ago" is such a ridiculous argument lol

33 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Because teams adjust and shut it down each game.

We aren't a good running team, we're a team that runs good in spurts, but the OL simply hasn't been good enough, run blocking requires more continuity than pass blocking b/c it's like a ballet, we did a good job trap blocking against the Browns, but not power runs.

As far as Peters v Mailata, people forget Peters outplayed Mailata before the Cleveland game, was it a bad game for him or a sign that he can't keep it up at his age and is better used off the bench - one trend that is obvious is they overrate declining veterans like Peters and Jeffrey and overpay them - and Ertz presents the same issue, though the cap will keep them from overpaying him next season in an extension. It's one thing to patch with veterans with low cost, short-term contracts (the Patriot way), quite another to commit most of your cap to over 30 players on long-term, big dead money deals. Howie used to be smart, don't know what happened to him.

As far as drafting Taylor in the late 3rd, it's easy to draft competent but limited LBs, we have two in Edwards and Singleton, it's harder to find above average LBs after the first 50 picks or so, Taylor was a bet on upside, Bradley is more your athletic late rd pick who starts on STs and hopefully develops over a few years. Problem wasn't those picks, it was the lack of talent in front of them, these are the kinds of players you marinate for a couple years - but blame Hicks, if he was durable, he's be the MLB and solidify the group. You pay anchor players, not guys who spend half the season on IR each year.

When so many players go elsewhere and have success, there is a coaching issue, either they can't coach up players, or they don't know how to work with the scouts to identify the type of player who is a good fit to their schemes - because if so many draft picks succeed elsewhere, the problem isn't drafting talent, but the right talent.

They need to fire Pederson b/c with the cap issues the team has to be blown up next year, at this point I have to hope they don't limp into the playoffs, get blown out and pick #19 or so. If I blow the team up, I want an innovative young HC like AR in 1999 to guide the team forward, with a coaching staff that can teach and develop young players. I think Pederson is a good players' coach that keeps a team on an even keel - they don't quit on him - but is more comfortable with veterans.

 

 

 

First, shots at Doug, and now at Howie. The Earth is tilting on its axis.

Wow!   Even Tommy Lawlor:

"As for Howie Roseman, I would fire him. "

54 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Because teams adjust and shut it down each game.

We aren't a good running team, we're a team that runs good in spurts, but the OL simply hasn't been good enough, run blocking requires more continuity than pass blocking b/c it's like a ballet, we did a good job trap blocking against the Browns, but not power runs.

As far as Peters v Mailata, people forget Peters outplayed Mailata before the Cleveland game, was it a bad game for him or a sign that he can't keep it up at his age and is better used off the bench - one trend that is obvious is they overrate declining veterans like Peters and Jeffrey and overpay them - and Ertz presents the same issue, though the cap will keep them from overpaying him next season in an extension. It's one thing to patch with veterans with low cost, short-term contracts (the Patriot way), quite another to commit most of your cap to over 30 players on long-term, big dead money deals. Howie used to be smart, don't know what happened to him.

As far as drafting Taylor in the late 3rd, it's easy to draft competent but limited LBs, we have two in Edwards and Singleton, it's harder to find above average LBs after the first 50 picks or so, Taylor was a bet on upside, Bradley is more your athletic late rd pick who starts on STs and hopefully develops over a few years. Problem wasn't those picks, it was the lack of talent in front of them, these are the kinds of players you marinate for a couple years - but blame Hicks, if he was durable, he's be the MLB and solidify the group. You pay anchor players, not guys who spend half the season on IR each year.

When so many players go elsewhere and have success, there is a coaching issue, either they can't coach up players, or they don't know how to work with the scouts to identify the type of player who is a good fit to their schemes - because if so many draft picks succeed elsewhere, the problem isn't drafting talent, but the right talent.

They need to fire Pederson b/c with the cap issues the team has to be blown up next year, at this point I have to hope they don't limp into the playoffs, get blown out and pick #19 or so. If I blow the team up, I want an innovative young HC like AR in 1999 to guide the team forward, with a coaching staff that can teach and develop young players. I think Pederson is a good players' coach that keeps a team on an even keel - they don't quit on him - but is more comfortable with veterans.

 

 

 

They also shut down our passing game. Maybe we should just punt on 1st down

56 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

I actually thought it would be higher than that. 

Just now, greend said:

I actually thought it would be higher than that. 

With the 750,364 turnovers by the offense I would've thought it would be higher, too.