38 minutes ago, Swoop said:

I've said a number of times (feel free to go look) that Wentz has been dreadful this season and flat out sucks. 

That doesn't eliminate the previous four seasons of his career or your clearly biased, one sided agenda. 

Carson Wentz is arguably (likely) the worst QB in football this season. Correcting your asinine conclusion that he's always been "mediocre" has nothing to do with his play this season. Again: it does not have anything to do with his play this season. It does not excuse the stupidity we have seen him display for this season.

What about that is hard to grasp? Pointing out that Wentz hasn't been "flukey" in the NFL since 2017 means a fan is a "Wentz Washer"? Yet you sit and wonder why people call you out on your constant hogwash.

If you aren't trolling I am genuinely concerned for your mental state, because you're truly incapable of grasping reality. That must be a scary thing.

I've learned that you cannot accept reason. You cannot accept reality. You cannot keep up with a conversation and I really am never going to entertain this discussion with you again. 

I already pointed out that Wentz was below average in 2016.  Excusable because it was his rookie year.  Fantastic in 2017, but unfortunately that was a fluke.  Then mediocre in 2018 and 2019.  And obviously atrocious in 2020.

So your nitpick is that I refuse to give Wentz enough credit for 2018 and 2019.  You think he was great those two seasons.  I don't.

For you to get all dramatic about this disagreement ("incapable of grasping reality", "scary", "cannot accept reason") with your OPINION, shows that you're emotionally invested in Carson Wentz to the point where you can't judge him objectively.  Only an ignorant psycho thinks everyone who doesn't agree with his uninformed opinions must be deluded.

Sad to say, but you're a classic example of Dunning-Kruger syndrome.

Just now, LeanMeanGM said:

Yea. But what would Maddox vs Metcalf be like to watch? 

If anyone but Slay is on Metcalf tomorrow then Jim should be fired Tuesdays. Dont get me wrong, I think they will attack Slay but that is the ONLY matchup that has a shot. 

7 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 No, unless you move Dillard 

Sure move him for whatever we get.  But we'd be beyond stupid to pass on a Hall of Fame LT like Sewell because we have guys like Dillard and Mailata.

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Yea. But what would Maddox vs Metcalf be like to watch? 

Even worse, but let's not underrate Lockett. He's a really good player too.

Jags now has gone through 2 GMs, multiple assistant coaches but still keeping the same HC? Marrone has to have some really juicy stuff on Khan. 

http://www.theredzone.org/Blog-Description/EntryId/84870/Jaguars-fire-GM-Dave-Caldwell-after-10th-straight-loss

Metcalf vs JJAW part 3 😈
 

Tune in, should be a fun one.

1 minute ago, Br3 said:

Metcalf vs JJAW part 3 😈

At this point I think thats a dead topic. Moving on

10 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

Even worse, but let's not underrate Lockett. He's a really good player too.

For sure, it’s definitely pick your poison. 

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

For sure, it’s definitely pick your poison. 

and chances are Wilson will break multiple tackles because our defense doesn't always wrap up. So, he will extend plays which allows Lockett and Metcalf more time to get open.

2 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

At this point I think thats a dead topic. Moving on

Won’t be dead for the next 15 years at least

19 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

But we'd be beyond stupid to pass on a Hall of Fame LT like Sewell because we have guys like Dillard and Mailata.

Your hyperbole is beyond exhausting.

8 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

At this point I think thats a dead topic. Moving on

The next one is Jefferson vs Reagor. Early results don’t look too promising. 

17 minutes ago, Br3 said:

Metcalf vs JJAW part 3 😈
 

Tune in, should be a fun one.

Oh?  Is JJAW playing CB tomorrow night? 

16 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

At this point I think thats a dead topic. Moving on

If only... 

What a shot by jaylon Johnson. 

Just now, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

What a shot by jaylon Johnson. 

Absolutely beautiful hit. 

1 hour ago, Saltpeter said:

What's your personal threshold for replacing the franchise QB if the backup can play better?

We've seen nothing yet from Jalen Hurts in the NFL to say anything definitive, but it's kind of hard to believe he would be worse than Wentz at this point. How much better than Wentz would he have to be for you to make the change, at least for a game or some indefinite timeframe? Or do you think that once the "franchise QB" investment is made, you have to ride it out no matter what?

It's my opinion that there are 3 types of QB situations.

1.  Teams with elite QBs.

2.  Teams developing QBs they hope will become elite.

3.  Teams making due and waiting to find someone better.

Wentz is getting a little old to fit into #2.  Everyone moves from #2 to #1 or #3 eventually.  I think the Eagles have made that move.   Once you have, you don't hesitate to make changes to evaluate other guys, even if they are flawed like Hurts.

 

20 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

It's my opinion that there are 3 types of QB situations.

1.  Teams with elite QBs.

2.  Teams developing QBs they hope will become elite.

3.  Teams making due and waiting to find someone better.

Wentz is getting a little old to fit into #2.  Everyone moves from #2 to #1 or #3 eventually.  I think the Eagles have made that move.   Once you have, you don't hesitate to make changes to evaluate other guys, even if they are flawed like Hurts.

You dont need an elite QB to be a consistent winning team or even to win SBs. This has been proven over and over again. So you seam to be missing a few other "types" of Qb situations in your theory. 

9 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

You dont need an elite QB to be a consistent winning team or even to win SBs. This has been proven over and over again. So you seam to be missing a few other "types" of Qb situations in your theory. 

Ah, so you have created group 4.  Teams with average to just above average QB's who are fine with it.  You go have fun in that group.

@In2football I forgot if I did a prediction but 

Eagles 20 Seahawks 46. 13 of our 20 points come in the 4th quarter 

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

Ah, so you have created group 4.  Teams with average to just above average QB's who are fine with it.  You go have fun in that group.

Many teams in that group win SBs. Prob just as many in that group then Elite Qbs winning SBs in the last 10 years. 

Was Brady an elite QB in 2018(good that year but not elite, esp in the SB)? Foles in 2017? Peyton with the Broncos in 2015? Eli in either SB year? Joe Flacco? 

Point is teams know they can win a SB or at least contend with a good, non elite QB if the system is a right match and the team and coaching around them is good. Not to mention QBs go on and off that list all the time. Only a rare number stay on that list most of their career and most if not all of them only won 1 SB if any. 

Just now, DeathByEagle said:

Many teams in that group win SBs. Prob just as many in that group then Elite Qbs winning SBs in the last 10 years. 

Was Brady an elite QB in 2018(good that year but not elite, esp in the SB)? Foles in 2017? Peyton with the Broncos in 2015? Eli in either SB year? Joe Flacco? 

Point is teams know they can win a SB or at least contend with a good, non elite QB if the system is a right match and the team and coaching around them is good. Not to mention QBs go on and off that list all the time. Only a rare number stay on that list most of their career and most if not all of them only won 1 SB if any. 

Carson Wentz was an elite QB in 2017.  Without an elite QB, the Eagles don't win 13 regular season games and secure HFA.  Without HFA, they never make it to the SB.  And without Foles playing a historically great SB, they don't win it.

If you want to hinge your SB odds on a career average QB catching lightning in a bottle and being incredible for a SB run (Eli, Flacco), then you are just sitting back and hoping for dumb luck.  That's not a blueprint.  

16 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Ah, so you have created group 4.  Teams with average to just above average QB's who are fine with it.  You go have fun in that group.

So your spectrum doesn't have any room between above average and elite? 

1 hour ago, QuinnWR4 said:

Between Johnson, Dillard, and Mailata is tackle worth the high investment? Aside from JP and Johnson playing on one leg, tackle play hasn’t been as bad as the interior oline. And I wouldn’t spend a top 10 pick on a guard or center. 

OT is far from the Eagles most pressing need.  The team drafted Dillard in the first round; develop and play him.  Johnson has at least 3 good years left once his ankle is repaired properly.  Mailata will be fine as a swing tackle and can fill the role when one of them goes out injured.

If the Eagles are picking top 10 it needs to be Chase, Parsons, or Surtain Jr.  There is still almost a criminal lack of talent at WR.  The current GM/coaching regime has emptied the roster of any LB talent, and the CB play will return to being a league embarrassment if/when Slay is gone.

49 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

It's my opinion that there are 3 types of QB situations.

1.  Teams with elite QBs.

2.  Teams developing QBs they hope will become elite.

3.  Teams making due and waiting to find someone better.

Wentz is getting a little old to fit into #2.  Everyone moves from #2 to #1 or #3 eventually.  I think the Eagles have made that move.   Once you have, you don't hesitate to make changes to evaluate other guys, even if they are flawed like Hurts.

Your theory sucks.