10 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I'll make it simple, so that it doesn't drag on.   Mailata WAS NOT A FOOTBALL PLAYER.  So... what was Howie basing his scouting on?  Rugby... aka, pure athleticism.  Mailata didn't know how to line up, how to move, or even what the rules were... yeah... Howie is a genius!  Give me a break.  He bought a lottery ticket, and it hit.  Buying lottery tickets isn't 'financially planning' that's blind luck.  So, if your financial planner says, put all your savings into lottery tickets and use that for retirement - RUN.   Howie doesn't get the credit.  And if Howie deserves the credit for Mailata, then explain his failures with just about every other pick since he took over again in 2016.  He's hit maybe 4 times.

And for the record... Howie's issues are broader than the 2020 draft, and if you can't see that, that's sad.  Look at any list of Howie's draft picks... no matter where you want to draw the line... and tell me how it is even AVERAGE, let alone 'good'.  

 

 

But, we're done here.  And if you want to know when the ignore button gets used, I'll tell you... its when a person is incapable of actually presenting a cogent argument, but presents straw men, false equivalencies and frankly its a waste of time to read, let alone respond to.   But, you'll see it as a victory of your masterful debate skills.   Congrats.  

If you went with master debating skills it would’ve been hilarious lol. 

Howie’s results have been putrid over the past three years — not the draft, not in FA and certainly not with the cap. 

I don’t see much of an argument to keep him.

People might point to Joe Douglas and the draft, but Howie hired him and had final say over the picks.

People might point to Covid and suggest that is the culprit. It was the death blow to our cap, but we were heading off a cliff anyway. This only expedited things. 

Name a single good FA addition over the past three years, a guy on a fair contract who made an impact for more than a few games. 

Taylor was basically drafted on pure athleticism, since he has limited football experience.

If he had played enough to master the LB position, he'd either not been drafted at all or in the top 50 (i.e. either he's too dumb or he would have been a top prospect).

He was available at #104 because he has a low floor.

The skill of a GM in drafting projects is knowing when to pull the trigger to maximize the expected value of the draft pick.

2 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Taylor was basically drafted on pure athleticism, since he has limited football experience.

If he had played enough to master the LB position, he'd either not been drafted at all or in the top 50 (i.e. either he's too dumb or he would have been a top prospect).

He was available at #104 because he has a low floor.

The skill of a GM in drafting projects is knowing when to pull the trigger to maximize the expected value of the draft pick.

Do you think Howie did that?

Just now, ManuManu said:

Howie’s results have been putrid over the past three years — not the draft, not in FA and certainly not with the cap. 

I don’t see much of an argument to keep him.

People might point to Joe Douglas and the draft, but Howie hired him and had final say over the picks.

People might point to Covid and suggest that is the culprit. It was the death blow to our cap, but we were heading off a cliff anyway. This only expedited things. 

Name a single good FA addition over the past three years, a guy on a fair contract who made an impact for more than a few games. 

I'd hold off on Hargrave, he's been coming on the last few games, he's one guy who really needed exhibition games b/c Eagles have totally different DL scheme than Pittsburgh.

Slay was a good addition, Darby not so much. Bradham good, Malik not so much (though injury was an issue, 30+ is always a risk). Brooks was great, DeSean not so much. Jeffrey was great, extending him was stupid given his injury history and skills which suggested a falloff after 2017. Jenkins, McLeod good.

Low cost FAs and SFAs are always a gamble, you're basically judged on them by hits, not misses.

5 minutes ago, austinfan said:

I'd hold off on Hargrave, he's been coming on the last few games, he's one guy who really needed exhibition games b/c Eagles have totally different DL scheme than Pittsburgh.

Slay was a good addition, Darby not so much. Bradham good, Malik not so much (though injury was an issue, 30+ is always a risk). Brooks was great, DeSean not so much. Jeffrey was great, extending him was stupid given his injury history and skills which suggested a falloff after 2017. Jenkins, McLeod good.

Low cost FAs and SFAs are always a gamble, you're basically judged on them by hits, not misses.

Slay cost a 3rd round pick... AND a high cap hit. And was a forced move after they pretty much failed with Darby, Jones and Douglas... and to a lesser extent Maddox.

 

Jeffery was great in 2017.   We are discussing the last 3 years. 

 

I'll wait for a 'good' move since the Super Bowl... You will struggle to find 3... which would be an average of just 1 per offseason.

2 hours ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Yeah the Broncos completed 1 pass all game. And attempted just 9. And of those 9 passes 2 were picked and another 2 should have. So yes while wentz has been bad Hinton is likely never playing QB again. 

It was a joke dude. 

2 minutes ago, austinfan said:

I'd hold off on Hargrave, he's been coming on the last few games, he's one guy who really needed exhibition games b/c Eagles have totally different DL scheme than Pittsburgh.

Slay was a good addition, Darby not so much. Bradham good, Malik not so much (though injury was an issue, 30+ is always a risk). Brooks was great, DeSean not so much. Jeffrey was great, extending him was stupid given his injury history and skills which suggested a falloff after 2017. Jenkins, McLeod good.

Low cost FAs and SFAs are always a gamble, you're basically judged on them by hits, not misses.

I’m talking about a three year sample size. All of Howie’s good moves came prior to 2018. He’s been awful since. 

Hargrave will be fine, but worth his contract? Keep in mind Howie added him to an already insanely expensive DT group. Slay was a good addition. 

How about any of his 2018 and 2019 additions?

Slay was a good addition... let's not get crazy.

Unfortunately, we probably won't be a contender until Slay is older and off the team.

1 hour ago, jwill2420 said:

Yes because the bloggers are better than everyone else. I swear you only hear about people ignore list in the blog like the content in here is any better than you can get anywhere else on google. Some people need to get over themselves...

For me the ignore list isn’t about feeling better or smarter than anyone else; it just gets to a point where that person doesn’t want to hear from me any more than I do them — just oil and water and there isn’t anything constructive in the dialogue, so why make everyone else read it?

hey eagle directv users , they removed cbs channel 9 here in va , long story short the eagles game is on cbs and now i won't get it unless directv knows the game isn't local anymore so i hope it will be on their nfl ticket channels. anybody have any info on this , i most likely have to call or save myself the sorrow of defeat.

3 hours ago, Mike030270 said:

I think Rodgers gets 7TDs this game. Not sure how many of those will be from Adams. Probably most

Sheesh! What do you think he'll do in the 2nd quarter?

2 hours ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I mean there’s always you could stop coming to the blog if that’s how you feel. There is that option for you.

 

18 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

Slay was a good addition... let's not get crazy.

Unfortunately, we probably won't be competitive until Slay is older and off the team.

Slay was an expensive addition.  And... hasn't paid off at all.  

So, let's play this out... Slay was a good addition, but was he what the team needed?  The team needed (and did at the start of last offseason) to get younger and cheaper.  Slay is neither of those.  He was another 'win now' move on a team that clearly had their window close after the 2018 season.  I didn't believe that before the 2019 season, but the writing was on the wall, I just couldn't read it.  Now, everyone can read it.   

Would the 3rd round pick have been better used than adding Slay and keeping either Jones or Douglas and the money that he'll cost on the salary cap... 

That's not the type of contract you want to pick up when trading for a 29 year old.  But, Howie (as he has done so often) traded away draft capital, and then signed the new addition to a new deal.  The Eagles are on the hook for $9.75M of that if a new GM decides to move on from him (like he should) after this season.  But, Howie... KNOWING about the pandemic... KNOWING about the likely drop in the 2021 salary cap STILL made this move.  To what end, really?    Just stupid.    But, hey, we know how he'll fix it.  He'll take that $12M guaranteed salary, and spread it over the next 5 years, by adding two meaningless empty years at the end of this contract, "lowering" the cap hit for 2021, and having to deal with it in 2024 and 2025.   And the Eagles gain $9.3M on the cap converting $11M of the guaranteed money to a signing bonus spread over the last 3 years, plus two.  And for no real benefit to the team.   Meanwhile, trading him and getting whatever the Eagles could salvage from that move would free up $6M, and get him off the books immediately, giving the team more cap flexibility in the future, rather than extending the misery.  

 

Tell me again, how the Slay deal was a good move... 

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Slay was an expensive addition.  And... hasn't paid off at all.  

So, let's play this out... Slay was a good addition, but was he what the team needed?  The team needed (and did at the start of last offseason) to get younger and cheaper.  Slay is neither of those.  He was another 'win now' move on a team that clearly had their window close after the 2018 season.  I didn't believe that before the 2019 season, but the writing was on the wall, I just couldn't read it.  Now, everyone can read it.   

Would the 3rd round pick have been better used than adding Slay and keeping either Jones or Douglas and the money that he'll cost on the salary cap... 

That's not the type of contract you want to pick up when trading for a 29 year old.  But, Howie (as he has done so often) traded away draft capital, and then signed the new addition to a new deal.  The Eagles are on the hook for $9.75M of that if a new GM decides to move on from him (like he should) after this season.  But, Howie... KNOWING about the pandemic... KNOWING about the likely drop in the 2021 salary cap STILL made this move.  To what end, really?    Just stupid.    But, hey, we know how he'll fix it.  He'll take that $12M guaranteed salary, and spread it over the next 5 years, by adding two meaningless empty years at the end of this contract, "lowering" the cap hit for 2021, and having to deal with it in 2024 and 2025.   And the Eagles gain $9.3M on the cap converting $11M of the guaranteed money to a signing bonus spread over the last 3 years, plus two.  And for no real benefit to the team.   Meanwhile, trading him and getting whatever the Eagles could salvage from that move would free up $9.75M, and get him off the books immediately, giving the team more cap flexibility in the future, rather than extending the misery.  

 

Tell me again, how the Slay deal was a good move... 

Before this season, I doubt you thought this team couldnt "win now. "

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Slay was an expensive addition.  And... hasn't paid off at all.  

So, let's play this out... Slay was a good addition, but was he what the team needed?  The team needed (and did at the start of last offseason) to get younger and cheaper.  Slay is neither of those.  He was another 'win now' move on a team that clearly had their window close after the 2018 season.  I didn't believe that before the 2019 season, but the writing was on the wall, I just couldn't read it.  Now, everyone can read it.   

Would the 3rd round pick have been better used than adding Slay and keeping either Jones or Douglas and the money that he'll cost on the salary cap... 

That's not the type of contract you want to pick up when trading for a 29 year old.  But, Howie (as he has done so often) traded away draft capital, and then signed the new addition to a new deal.  The Eagles are on the hook for $9.75M of that if a new GM decides to move on from him (like he should) after this season.  But, Howie... KNOWING about the pandemic... KNOWING about the likely drop in the 2021 salary cap STILL made this move.  To what end, really?    Just stupid.    But, hey, we know how he'll fix it.  He'll take that $12M guaranteed salary, and spread it over the next 5 years, by adding two meaningless empty years at the end of this contract, "lowering" the cap hit for 2021, and having to deal with it in 2024 and 2025.   And the Eagles gain $9.3M on the cap converting $11M of the guaranteed money to a signing bonus spread over the last 3 years, plus two.  And for no real benefit to the team.   Meanwhile, trading him and getting whatever the Eagles could salvage from that move would free up $9.75M, and get him off the books immediately, giving the team more cap flexibility in the future, rather than extending the misery.  

 

Tell me again, how the Slay deal was a good move... 

Pass. You seem to have it all figured out.

1 minute ago, HazletonEagle said:

Before this season, I doubt you thought this team couldnt "win now. "

Before this season... I thought the WRs were garbage and needed an overhaul, and the defense was weak on the backend.  I thought the team could win the division easily, but as for being a 'true Super Bowl contender'.  No.  It was one of those... 'let's get to the dance and hope to catch lightning in a bottle'.  But, like I said, I couldn't read the writing.  The writing is clear now.  

 

Incidentally, I was against the Slay deal at the time.  It was a move along the lines of not trading for Amari Cooper, then moving for Golden Tate.  The Eagles passed on Jalen Ramsey, but then did almost the same move going for Darius Slay, who was older and not as good.  

4 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

Pass. You seem to have it all figured out.

I'm not saying he's not a good player.  What I am saying is that when it's all weighed out, it was a bad move.  

6 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Slay was an expensive addition.  And... hasn't paid off at all.  

So, let's play this out... Slay was a good addition, but was he what the team needed?  The team needed (and did at the start of last offseason) to get younger and cheaper.  Slay is neither of those.  He was another 'win now' move on a team that clearly had their window close after the 2018 season.  I didn't believe that before the 2019 season, but the writing was on the wall, I just couldn't read it.  Now, everyone can read it.   

Would the 3rd round pick have been better used than adding Slay and keeping either Jones or Douglas and the money that he'll cost on the salary cap... 

That's not the type of contract you want to pick up when trading for a 29 year old.  But, Howie (as he has done so often) traded away draft capital, and then signed the new addition to a new deal.  The Eagles are on the hook for $9.75M of that if a new GM decides to move on from him (like he should) after this season.  But, Howie... KNOWING about the pandemic... KNOWING about the likely drop in the 2021 salary cap STILL made this move.  To what end, really?    Just stupid.    But, hey, we know how he'll fix it.  He'll take that $12M guaranteed salary, and spread it over the next 5 years, by adding two meaningless empty years at the end of this contract, "lowering" the cap hit for 2021, and having to deal with it in 2024 and 2025.   And the Eagles gain $9.3M on the cap converting $11M of the guaranteed money to a signing bonus spread over the last 3 years, plus two.  And for no real benefit to the team.   Meanwhile, trading him and getting whatever the Eagles could salvage from that move would free up $9.75M, and get him off the books immediately, giving the team more cap flexibility in the future, rather than extending the misery.  

 

Tell me again, how the Slay deal was a good move... 

I've been saying this too...just not with this much detail.  Slay is a rental.  He won't be a top player by the time this team is ready to compete again.  No one was expecting a dumpster fire this year like we've seen but if you looked at the way the roster was constructed, the bad drafts and the horrible salary cap shape it didn't make much sense to trade draft capital for Slay then pay him handsomely.  It wasn't a smart move.

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Before this season... I thought the WRs were garbage and needed an overhaul, and the defense was weak on the backend.  I thought the team could win the division easily, but as for being a 'true Super Bowl contender'.  No.  It was one of those... 'let's get to the dance and hope to catch lightning in a bottle'.  But, like I said, I couldn't read the writing.  The writing is clear now.  

 

Incidentally, I was against the Slay deal at the time.  It was a move along the lines of not trading for Amari Cooper, then moving for Golden Tate.  The Eagles passed on Jalen Ramsey, but then did almost the same move going for Darius Slay, who was older and not as good.  

I'm not saying he's not a good player.  What I am saying is that when it's all weighed out, it was a bad move.  

its probably better to have Slays 3 years remaining (and outs before then) than to have signed a mega deal for Ramsey when we are going nowhere. Both would be bad moves in that regard, with hindsight.

But good at the time. 

3 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

its probably better to have Slays 3 years remaining (and outs before then) than to have signed a mega deal for Ramsey when we are going nowhere. Both would be bad moves in that regard, with hindsight.

But good at the time. 

Well, I was against both at the time.  But, I was also looking at the 2021 salary cap as an issue before the pandemic hit and the salary cap would be lowered.

 

You are correct, Slay's deal is better than a mega-deal for Ramsey, only because there are outs.  And when the best thing about a deal is the outs that are involved, that right there tells you how good the move is.

One thing about Davion Taylor -- even though he was drafted with technically a 3rd round pick, it was a compensatory pick that is more of a 4th rounder in value. For perspective, the Eagles drafted Matt Barkley in the 4th with pick 98, and Taylor in the 3rd with pick 103. Saying "3rd rounder" vs. "4th rounder" makes the pick value like this huge difference when in this case it really isn't.

15 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Before this season, I doubt you thought this team couldnt "win now. "

I don’t think it was that much of a stretch to see this team was on the decline even with the slay/hargrave additions and the last 4 games last year were fools gold. I can say for certain 4for4, bpac and i laid this all out why it began looking like they were at the end of the era and needed a couple years to get back to legit SB contender.  People didn’t want to believe it.  only thing that’s been massively off about was wentz’s performance on the season. It made for a 8-9 win team that wasn’t a contender to where we are now. 

Question to folks who watch All-22...

That deep ball Wentz threw to Reagor where Reagor was "completely blanked" by Shaquill Griffin, Seattle was in cover 3, right?

14 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Question to folks who watch All-22...

That deep ball Wentz threw to Reagor where Reagor was "completely blanked" by Shaquill Griffin, Seattle was in cover 3, right?

You mean the one where reagor route faded toward the sideline as he was running down the field?

 

2 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I'll make it simple, so that it doesn't drag on.   Mailata WAS NOT A FOOTBALL PLAYER.  So... what was Howie basing his scouting on?  Rugby... aka, pure athleticism.  Mailata didn't know how to line up, how to move, or even what the rules were... yeah... Howie is a genius!  Give me a break.  He bought a lottery ticket, and it hit.  Buying lottery tickets isn't 'financially planning' that's blind luck.  So, if your financial planner says, put all your savings into lottery tickets and use that for retirement - RUN.   Howie doesn't get the credit.  And if Howie deserves the credit for Mailata, then explain his failures with just about every other pick since he took over again in 2016.  He's hit maybe 4 times.

And for the record... Howie's issues are broader than the 2020 draft, and if you can't see that, that's sad.  Look at any list of Howie's draft picks... no matter where you want to draw the line... and tell me how it is even AVERAGE, let alone 'good'.  

 

 

But, we're done here.  And if you want to know when the ignore button gets used, I'll tell you... its when a person is incapable of actually presenting a cogent argument, but presents straw men, false equivalencies and frankly its a waste of time to read, let alone respond to.   But, you'll see it as a victory of your masterful debate skills.   Congrats.  

 

I'm neither defending or criticizing Howie Roseman.  In my humble opinion, "The jury is still out" in regards to Howie Roseman and player/personnel decisions.

This past year's draft was likely the first true "Howie draft"...at least in some time.  When Andy Reid was here it was mostly Andy.  When Chip Kelly was here it was mostly Chip. 

Then Douglas was brought in (like I said, it's conjecture, imo) because we don't know how much of the past 5 or so years were "Howie", "Doug" or "Douglas" inspired.  My best guess (and from my understanding) is that Howie was the ultimate decision maker but he took a quite a bit of input from others (including scouts,).

And that wasn't my point.  My point had to do with your reasoning that Mailata's success was all due to coaching.  And I agree (without question) if Mailata had not been coached properly there's next to a zero chance he would be where he is now.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine that a former Rugby player who has never played football in his life would need the absolute best coaching in order for him to become an NFL starter.  That is not disputed.  But he wouldn't be here had he not been drafted.

And it's rich that you allude to Straw Man arguments when you have yet to answer a simple question.  

What happens if they start another QB and the offense looks remarkably better? 

Is it still the coaching?  Is it still the play calling?  Is it still the "rest of the team"?  Is it still Howie Roseman's fault?

 

And no, I don't think it's a "victory" when someone refuses to acknowledge the possibility that (just maybe) fixing this team involves a much simpler solution than, say, "Burning down the house."  

If you drive a Ferrari and get a flat tire, do you change the tire or do you say, "Car stopped working, I'll just burn it down"?