20 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

If Howie comes back, I'm pretty sure I'll find something else to do with my Sundays.   My wife loves Autumn... and hopefully by then we can open up.  I'll just make her super happy and we can enjoy 'autumnal' events each Sunday when the weather holds.  

Yeah, that will last about two weeks...

2 hours ago, Asg 15 said:

You guys posting about Jefferson and Claypool have to ask yourselves what would their stats look like if they were playing here.

Reagor and JJaw. 

Circling back to the Jim Schwartz talk.   I don't like his style of defense but it sure seems to work.  They lack turnovers which is frustrating as heck and they NEVER seem to stop the other team after the Eagles score.  I'm ready for a change and want an attacking defense that gets the ball. 

Crazy stat from the Seahawks game.  DK had 177 yards, the rest of the game they ran 50 plays for 124 yards.  2.5 yards per play.

This article however shows that the defense is pretty freaking stout.  

46 sacks so far.  8 more than any other team....how is that possible?  

4th in yards per play allowed at 5.0

3rd in big plays allowed, only 27 plays over 20 yards

5th in 3rd down efficiency at 37%

8th in passing yards allowed at 210 yards.

 

30 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I'm in a conflicted state of whether I should laugh or cry. 

Historically our WRs have been poor, but hasn't DeSean had similar/better seasons as well? Maclin, too.

IDK how accurate that is.

19 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

Yeah, that will last about two weeks...

Yeah, I know that seems to make sense, but I'm done with Howie.   If Howie comes back, it will just be more of the same... 

24 minutes ago, Swoop said:

Historically our WRs have been poor, but hasn't DeSean had similar/better seasons as well? Maclin, too.

IDK how accurate that is.

In 9 games? Don't see how thats possible for DeSean. His best year was 1,300 yards. His first 9 games were 50 rec, 823 yards, 6 TD's. If you take his 9 best games from that season, maybe, but I think he meant 9 consecutive games in a season, just worded it funny.

Never mind, he's being an idiot. DeSean had 9, thats not some huge difference from 11, especially with 400 more yards.

And Maclin had 1300+ yards and 10 TD's. But somehow that 1 less TD negates everything. Click bait. Carry on.

39 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

You speak as though the players or coaches want to lose games through the remainder of the season -- they don't.  The more games they lose, the more jobs get lost.

As a fan, just let the season play out and don't get so worked up about it, because you really have absolutely no control over it.

What the players/coaches want and what us eagles fans want is always at odds    We want what’s best for the eagles.  They  want what’s beat for themselves

11 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

In 9 games? Don't see how thats possible for DeSean. His best year was 1,300 yards. His first 9 games were 50 rec, 823 yards, 6 TD's. If you take his 9 best games from that season, maybe, but I think he meant 9 consecutive games in a season, just worded it funny.

Never mind, he's being an idiot. DeSean had 9, thats not some huge difference from 11, especially with 400 more yards.

That's what I thought at first, but yeah, he's just a moron. 

44 minutes ago, Swoop said:

Historically our WRs have been poor, but hasn't DeSean had similar/better seasons as well? Maclin, too.

IDK how accurate that is.

The point is Adams has 74, 908 and 11 in 9 games, not 16.

Desean only surpassed 74 catches in a season once, 908 yards 7 times, and never had double digit TD's

Maclin only surpassed 74 catches in a season twice, 908 yards 3 times and never had 11 TD's.

 

The point, Adams has done this in 9 games.

1 hour ago, SNOORDA said:

Not me homie.  Not anymore. 30 plus years of this and im finally tuned out

wake me when wholesale changes are made

so you’re not going to watch this weekend? 
 

🤔

39 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Circling back to the Jim Schwartz talk.   I don't like his style of defense but it sure seems to work.  They lack turnovers which is frustrating as heck and they NEVER seem to stop the other team after the Eagles score.  I'm ready for a change and want an attacking defense that gets the ball. 

Crazy stat from the Seahawks game.  DK had 177 yards, the rest of the game they ran 50 plays for 124 yards.  2.5 yards per play.

This article however shows that the defense is pretty freaking stout.  

46 sacks so far.  8 more than any other team....how is that possible?  

4th in yards per play allowed at 5.0

3rd in big plays allowed, only 27 plays over 20 yards

5th in 3rd down efficiency at 37%

8th in passing yards allowed at 210 yards.

 

I wonder how much correlation there is between the lack of turnovers generated on defense and the atrocious performance of the offense. No matter how well the defense has started games(Seahawks, Browns, Bengals, WTF) we always eventually find ourselves playing from behind because the offense can not do anything at all in the first half. Those other teams then having a lead usually end up playing more conservative to avoid costly turnovers that would swing the game because they know our dysfunctional offense has very little chance of catching up on their own. If we had a better offense and the lead in some games, then it might have caused the other offenses to take more risks to try to catch up and thus lead to more turnovers for our defense. 

Man, if Slay misses this game Adams is having a career game

1 hour ago, John_C said:

It's critical that we don't win any more games this year.  The 4th overall pick next year is well within our grasp

I am amused that you like my post showing the Patriots draft history and not drafting lower that 24 or in the first round at all multiple times, that it does not matter where you draft, it is what you do with the picks, and then post this begging to lose out for draft position.

14 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Man, if Slay misses this game Adams is having a career game

Does it really matter either way?

Just now, Khani1 said:

Does it really matter either way?

Yes

Just now, LeanMeanGM said:

Yes

Lose by 30 or lose by 14.  That matters?

Just now, Khani1 said:

Lose by 30 or lose by 14.  That matters?

Sure. 

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Sure. 

Good to know.

Two days in a row for Fletch. 

This team has packed it in, including the veterans.  Any minor injury and they will take a rest day and possibly not suit up on Sundays.  I can't blame them.  

1 minute ago, schuy7 said:

Two days in a row for Fletch. 

You have to wonder how much vets are going to push to play at this point. It would be nice to see them give someone like Raequan some playing time.

1 hour ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yeah, I know that seems to make sense, but I'm done with Howie.   If Howie comes back, it will just be more of the same... 

It'll be more of the same regardless because a new GM is still stuck with this cap situation until some of these contacts expire. 

On the other hand,  if Howie were still here then,  and switched gears from trying to hold the super bowl window open,  to rebuilding, I bet he'd do a great job with contacts again. 

Of course,  at this point he shouldn't survive in his position to see that day. 

17 minutes ago, Khani1 said:

Lose by 30 or lose by 14.  That matters?

Does it matter if you get kicked in the balls or slapped in the face?

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Does it matter if you get kicked in the balls or slapped in the face?

Dumb analogy.  You don't get bonus points for losing by less points.  It also does not affect your draft status.  If anything, I would rather get completely destroyed if it means that there will be major changes from the top to the bottom.

24 minutes ago, downundermike said:

I am amused that you like my post showing the Patriots draft history and not drafting lower that 24 or in the first round at all multiple times, that it does not matter where you draft, it is what you do with the picks, and then post this begging to lose out for draft position.

Are they mutually exclusive ideas?

Of course what you do with the picks matters most.  And surely you can find good players at any point in the draft.  However, the Eagles are where they are because they have drafted so poorly and are severely lacking in difference makers.  You have a much higher chance, much higher, to draft a true difference maker at the top of the draft.  Each draft usually has at least a couple and sometimes as many as a dozen real blue chip prospects.  Like when you take a Lane Johnson #4 overall and have an advantage over the rest of the league because you have a legitimate freak at right tackle.

I want the Eagles to have a real, bona fide NFL GM and personnel department that is second to none and picks players up and down the draft better than anyone else.  I want to have the smartest people in the league.  However, even when I have that, if they are picking in the 20s I know that they aren't going to find as many rare, difference making players as they will if they end up picking at the top of the draft.

So, yes, for this year, and really *most* years that the team falls out of contention, I want to see the losses and a high draft pick.  The year-to-year momentum idea that is often pushed by coaches at times is nonsense or at least not applicable or significant more than 80% of the time.  The exceptions are when you have a young team already starting from the bottom and have been at the top of the draft for a few years in a row.  If I was an owner thinking strategically, and my goals were maximizing winning and long term success, I would mandate or at least facilitate losing to the extend practical in these scenarios, such as where the Eagles are right now.

Edit: All that response and I totally neglected to make another significant point.  Losing out now makes it much easier for the ownership to justify making the changes necessary for future success (i.e. getting rid of the current GM and leadership and bringing in better people).  Whether you agree or disagree that drafting at the top of the draft is important, or even somewhat beneficial, I think we will agree that this move is very important.  Late season wins could confuse the owner and lead him down a path of rationalizations that would be very harmful for the team and fan base.