9 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

If Cunningham had not been injured during the first game of the 1991 season, the Eagles would have likely gone far into the playoffs that year...possibly the Super Bowl.  Randall was in his prime and that defense was among the best ever in the history of the NFL.   

They went 10-6 with the likes of Jim McMahon, Brad Goebel, Jeff Kemp and Pat Ryan at QB.  Easily a 13-3 team had Randall started every game that year. 

Possible however Washington had an excellent team. I’m not resting on the fact cause they won 10 games without Randall they were a lock to beat the redskins that year. They also got one win against Washington who didn’t give byner more than 12 touches and mark rypien didn’t play the whole game in a week 17 game 

21 minutes ago, wtfcares said:

Yeah let’s get rid of every good player we have on OL and DL. Maybe then we can be like 70 million under the cap like the Texans and win the Cap Award. Sounds like a great plan. 

That's not the case at all.  It's getting rid of formerly good players before it's too late.  It sucks but it has to happen.  The only ones on the list that are tough decisions are BG and Lane.  The rest can pound sand.  

Eagles fans all over are going to have to face reality vs. guys they like.  

The reality is, Cox isn't worth anywhere near $24 million.

Slay, while he's been good, is never going to be a part of the nucleus here.  He only has a 3-year contract. 

Hargrave was a mistake and like Slay isn't some young guy who they are going to build around.  He will be 30 by the time the Eagles are competitive again and then he'll be a FA. 

As good as Brooks has been and as determined as he's been to get back on the field, how much can you trust him to not get hurt again?  Need to be ready to play without him.

Lane has been breaking down the last 2 seasons and is on the cusp of being like JP where you know he's going to miss time.

BG will have value to a contending team but I think for what he's paid here you keep him.

It's going to suck but this team needs to get younger, cheaper and better.

9 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Just IR him

Who else had a mini heart attack thinking the end of this tweet was going to say he's still going to play LT?

10 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Just IR him

I'd rather just cut him.  The contract demand to play LT was just BS and really tainted his legacy for the time being.  

26 minutes ago, wtfcares said:

Yeah let’s get rid of every good player we have on OL and DL. Maybe then we can be like 70 million under the cap like the Texans and win the Cap Award. Sounds like a great plan. 

Some of the people around here are ready to gut the entire team (other than the QB), the entire coaching staff and the entire Front Office before admitting what the main issue is....

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

That's not the case at all.  It's getting rid of formerly good players before it's too late.  It sucks but it has to happen.  The only ones on the list that are tough decisions are BG and Lane.  The rest can pound sand.  

Eagles fans all over are going to have to face reality vs. guys they like.  

The reality is, Cox isn't worth anywhere near $24 million.

Slay, while he's been good, is never going to be a part of the nucleus here.  He only has a 3-year contract. 

Hargrave was a mistake and like Slay isn't some young guy who they are going to build around.  He will be 30 by the time the Eagles are competitive again and then he'll be a FA. 

As good as Brooks has been and as determined as he's been to get back on the field, how much can you trust him to not get hurt again?  Need to be ready to play without him.

Lane has been breaking down the last 2 seasons and is on the cusp of being like JP where you know he's going to miss time.

BG will have value to a contending team but I think for what he's paid here you keep him.

It's going to suck but this team needs to get younger, cheaper and better.

we are competitive next year cause he turns 30 in January. It’s more likely he’d be 31 or 32 by the time we are. 

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

Possible however Washington had an excellent team. I’m not resting on the fact cause they won 10 games without Randall they were a lock to beat the redskins that year. They also got one win against Washington who didn’t give byner more than 12 touches and mark rypien didn’t play the whole game in a week 17 game 

Yeah, Washington had a very good team that year and they always seemed to play us tough back then.  But looking back, that 1991 year is among my biggest "what if" years in Eagles history.

 

2 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

Some of the people around here are ready to gut the entire team (other than the QB), the entire coaching staff and the entire Front Office before admitting what the main issue is....

 

 

 

Some people on here also refuse to believe doug may also be part of the problem.... 

1 hour ago, Bacarty2 said:

Loved it. Another one calling Doug out lol

I would get canned calling my boss out. Most would.

6 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

Some of the people around here are ready to gut the entire team (other than the QB), the entire coaching staff and the entire Front Office before admitting what the main issue is....

 

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

Some people on here also refuse to believe doug may also be part of the problem.... 

I think Howie and Doug are bigger issues than the QB.  I really hope Hurts gets extended time tonight.  IMO he will be bad, brutally bad.  

He has had 15 touches and put the ball on the ground 20% of the time he has touched it.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Eagles pass defense is 6th in the NFL. Last year in the playoffs he had a big game but in the regular season game he only had 3 for 35. His high is 161 yards in a game and out of 28 games he has had over 100 yards in six. 
 

He’s a good player and I’m expecting multiple of these posts making him out to be a god. But that line is fine and could easily go either way.

If the line was 90 then sure I would agree. But 70 yards? Against this secondary? By halftime if Slay has kept Metcalf quiet but Lockett is running riot then Schwartz may be forced to make that change.

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

we are competitive next year cause he turns 30 in January. It’s more likely he’d be 31 or 32 by the time we are. 

Hargrave?  He's 28 this February.  

Just now, bpac55 said:

Hargrave?  He's 28 this February.  

I thought you were discussing slay. 

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

Some people on here also refuse to believe doug may also be part of the problem.... 

Obviously if the team is struggling the way it has this year, the head coach shares at least some of the blame.  But if they continue to struggle, then the head coach's responsibility is to bench players who are performing poorly (including the QB) and to replace them with players that could potentially perform better. 

If that doesn't work, then the head coach needs to further adjust scheme, etc.  I would expect all of that to take place if the team continues to struggle and well before even "thinking" about "gutting" the entire team.

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

 

I think Howie and Doug are bigger issues than the QB.  I really hope Hurts gets extended time tonight.  IMO he will be bad, brutally bad.  

He has had 15 touches and put the ball on the ground 20% of the time he has touched it.

I think howie is by far the biggest issue with this team. I said back in April this is a lousy roster and the only reason they’d max out at 9 wins is if wentz carried them again. They bought into the fools gold at the end of last year with the roster needing a few additions to be good. They were further away then they thought and howie botched the WR position again and ditto at no. 2 corner, safety and linebacker. I can’t fault him at OL cause i don’t think anyone could’ve predicted dillard and Brooks to be out before week 1. 

to me Carson has his issues. Clearly he has regressed and his mechanics are inconsistent and he’s making poor decisions with the ball. However i also watch multiple other teams with deficiencies and realize they are still creative with the personnel they have and find ways to scheme guys open. Then i watch the eagles and they don’t.  

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

I thought you were discussing slay. 

I may have been...I was talking about both and could have crossed some thoughts.

Either way, they are both short term pieces and won't be here when the Eagles are ready again.

18 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

That's not the case at all.  It's getting rid of formerly good players before it's too late.  It sucks but it has to happen.  The only ones on the list that are tough decisions are BG and Lane.  The rest can pound sand.  

Eagles fans all over are going to have to face reality vs. guys they like.  

The reality is, Cox isn't worth anywhere near $24 million.

Slay, while he's been good, is never going to be a part of the nucleus here.  He only has a 3-year contract. 

Hargrave was a mistake and like Slay isn't some young guy who they are going to build around.  He will be 30 by the time the Eagles are competitive again and then he'll be a FA. 

As good as Brooks has been and as determined as he's been to get back on the field, how much can you trust him to not get hurt again?  Need to be ready to play without him.

Lane has been breaking down the last 2 seasons and is on the cusp of being like JP where you know he's going to miss time.

BG will have value to a contending team but I think for what he's paid here you keep him.

It's going to suck but this team needs to get younger, cheaper and better.

In the NFL where talent is as hard to come by as it is, you do not get rid of players in the middle of their careers in anticipation of them potentially not being as good years later. 
 

Lane and Brooks are not old by OL standards at all. They are top 3 in their positions. They can easily play at a high level for another 4-5 years. 
 

Slay can also easily be good for another 3-4 years. 
 

Cox and Malik I’ll give you are over paid. 
 

Hargrave is only 28. He’s had a bad year this year(10 games) but he’s shown he can be a force every year before. Why get rid of that when again he can be good for another 5 years. 
 

BG at this point is towards the end of his career. Although he’s still playing great. If the team sees themselves as having to rebuild then sure get rid of him. But if we get a new coach who thinks they can turn this team around, keeping him at 12 million a year with this kind of production is worth it. 
 

Maybe if this team didn’t spend all their high end draft capital trying to replicate the Chiefs with WRs and RBs and actually spent it where it matters on the Lines we would be better and younger now. But let me guess you’re one of the ones that want us to draft Chase next draft. 

7 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

If the line was 90 then sure I would agree. But 70 yards? Against this secondary? By halftime if Slay has kept Metcalf quiet but Lockett is running riot then Schwartz may be forced to make that change.

He's not going to make a change just to make a change. And I still don't get what you mean by "this secondary". This secondary has been fine all year against opposing teams #1's. NRC and Maddox are the ones that kill them. If Schwartz is dumb enough to put 5'9'' Maddox on 6'4'' Metcalf he should be fired by halftime. 

1 minute ago, Ace Nova said:

Obviously if the team is struggling the way it has this year, the head coach shares at least some of the blame.  But if they continue to struggle, then the head coach's responsibility is to bench players who are performing poorly (including the QB) and to replace them with players that could potentially perform better. 

If that doesn't work, then the head coach needs to further adjust scheme, etc.  I would expect all of that to take place if the team continues to struggle and well before even "thinking" about "gutting" the entire team.

I never said anything about gutting the team. Frankly not going to happen. However i said last year the defense needed a rebuild. And i still believe that. The defense is fools gold. Their numbers look better than what they are cause they faced Mullens, Dinucci and Haskins. Next 4 games are going to be telling. 

However doug is an issue right now as wentz is. Watching multiple teams all 22 with poor talent or missing guys they are still creative. The tape doesnt lie. They are one of the teams with the fewest pre-snap motion and creativity is lacking. Add on they refuse to run routes that cater toward reagor’s strengths and fail to get the ball into fulgham’s hands before halftime for now 4 consecutive weeks.

wentz has his massive problems with mechanics and decision making. However watching all 22 from the eagles and other teams such as the niners, rams, Carolina amongst others will show the lack of ability to be creative, lack of pre-snap motion and lack of utilizing our guys too their strengths. 

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

He's not going to make a change just to make a change. And I still don't get what you mean by "this secondary". This secondary has been fine all year against opposing teams #1's. NRC and Maddox are the ones that kill them. If Schwartz is dumb enough to put 5'9'' Maddox on 6'4'' Metcalf he should be fired by halftime. 

This secondary... Is 4 players and 2 of them are bad, like really bad. So that's half of the secondary. And you're trying to argue that it has been fine?

Just now, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

This secondary... Is 4 players and 2 of them are bad, like really bad. So that's half of the secondary. And you're trying to argue that it has been fine?

I’d argue mcleod hasn’t exactly been good. He’s been about average. He just looks more competent cause nrc, maddox and mills aren’t competent starters 

2 hours ago, RLC said:

Sidney Jones and Rasul Douglas are both still bad. They're just on worst teams than us. 

The problem was signing RNC and not drafting a CB in RD2-3. Michael Ojemudia went in RD3 and is crushing it in Denver.

Disagree. It’s easy to say every guy in our secondary is bad since Schwartz has been here. Adjust your scheme or develop somebody. 
 

Funny feeling so meh about a game when a W puts you in 1st place in the division.  Can't ever say that's been the case before for me.

I have a feeling the team plays well tonight.

 

4 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

This secondary... Is 4 players and 2 of them are bad, like really bad. So that's half of the secondary. And you're trying to argue that it has been fine?

I'm arguing that Slay has been fine so "this secondary" doesn't mean anything if they have him shadow DK all game. 

And overall it has not been really bad. Situationally they are bad. But they still are 6th in the entire league in passing yards against. 

3 minutes ago, Casey @ Bat said:

Disagree. It’s easy to say every guy in our secondary is bad since Schwartz has been here. Adjust your scheme or develop somebody. 
 

Jones numbers are a little misleading. He definitely is playing better than he was here. However The jags are getting gashed on the ground. They have given up the fourth most rushing yards in the league and the 3rd most attempts against them. Teams are passing 53% of the time and running 47%. In a passing league that generally doesn’t happen unless you are awful against the run. They are top half of the league in fewest pass attempts.