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

Another great narrative and definitive  assumption made with little fact by you lol. So knowing the Saints have the best defense in the league and if the offense struggles he still is OK because he put a rookie quarterback out there against the best defense in the league. Yup definitely team wrong. That doesn’t look like doug has a built in excuse for why the offense would struggle against the saints with hurts.... but another great narrative by you. You have really proven it was lurie or howie who didn’t want to play hurts.... riiiight 

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

So what do you think the built-in narrative is right now for Doug? Well we had a rookie quarterback going to get the number one defense so that’s reason enough why the offense would struggle. Interesting right. So now if the offense struggles he can say well he was a rookie quarterback going to get the best defense in the league. Interesting how we pick the time a period of going to hurt when he did. I’m not earlier like three weeks ago when he could’ve pulled Carson against a bad Dallas defense or seattle defense where hurts should have easier time having success.

Also if we remember what I said if I was going to start Jalen hurts if I were doug I would start him against an easier defense because it could make me look like my offense is capable or good. Meanwhile we’re starting him against the number one defense so my offense continues to struggle at least I have the built-in excuse what was the number one defense we were playing. Meanwhile if hurts was to start against Dallas who ranks near the bottom of the league and they struggle it goes right back on doug

what i last thing i said to you in that conversation was this and you have yet to definitively prove that isn’t the case either way. Interesting you like to make definitive facts without proof. Again routine problem from you.

So what happens if the offense looks better against the #1 defense? 

3 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

I don’t know why you’re laughing. Again have you proven that lurie or howie didn’t make the decision? No. Amazing how you like to call people wrong yet you somehow have yet to prove anything of which you stated previously lol. Pure amazing on your end.  

I find it amazing you seemingly use your assumptions on the situations to make it as if it’s definitive fact.

Mailata gonna be a player I'm telling you.  

 

3 minutes ago, CaliEagle said:

It depends on how ready Brees really is. He might play, but not be 100%. He had multiple broken ribs, so he might have trouble getting zip on passes if he's not 100% back. I don't know how he can be 100% coming off multiple broken ribs and a punctured lung, but he's one of those guys who might want to play at 80%.

I don’t think they would clear him to play if he wasn’t close to 100%. 

4 hours ago, Ace Nova said:

Not with Wentz.  With the deluded thought process (of Wentz die-hard fans) that seem to think that benching a QB will ruin his career.  My issues have always been with the few dozen or so fans around here who idolize Wentz.  

The bizarre obsession is beyond logic or reason.  My best guess is that they may not all be Eagles fans...but primarily Wentz fans who started following the team more closely once they drafted Wentz....and some of them likely his fans from college.

That's the only way to rationalize it, imo. 

 

As for Wentz himself, I like him as a person and I think he can rebound from getting benched....if he puts the work in to fix his mechanics and other issues.

 

While you look in the mirror, just replace that bolded part with:

"The bizarre obsession is beyond logic or reason.  My best guess is that I might not be an Eagles fan...but primarily a Foles fan who started following the team more closely once Foles won the SB and I've cried myself to sleep every night since he's been gone."

Every "Wentz die-hard" points out numerous flaws with him and gives him a huge portion of the blame this season.  You just choose not to see it.  You take the opportunity to blast him whenever someone else is discussing the other 37 issues we currently have on offense.  

2 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Mailata gonna be a player I'm telling you.  

 

Eh, Mailata only makes that block because Hurts is in the Game.  Spark and all that.

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

I don’t think they would clear him to play if he wasn’t close to 100%. 

Teams do that all the time. The NFL is about money.  If they feel he isn't healthy, but that he isn't at risk for further injury...then they will clear him. But, that doesn't mean he is 100%.

 

6 minutes ago, hputenis said:

While you look in the mirror, just replace that bolded part with:

"The bizarre obsession is beyond logic or reason.  My best guess is that I might not be an Eagles fan...but primarily a Foles fan who started following the team more closely once Foles won the SB and I've cried myself to sleep every night since he's been gone."

Every "Wentz die-hard" points out numerous flaws with him and gives him a huge portion of the blame this season.  You just choose not to see it.  You take the opportunity to blast him whenever someone else is discussing the other 37 issues we currently have on offense.  

This times a million. And then he goes I don’t hate Carson wentz and I’ve said doug was part of the problem but really he didnt. Everything he says on this board goes back to Carson. Legitimately was talking about the defense during the Rams game being atrocious. Somehow he brought it back to Carson Wentz. I can talk about Carson with in a separate topic. I don’t need you butting in when we’re talking about the defense cause he has an obsession with wentz. 

Who will be taping over their Aker's jersey?? taping over the

3 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Mailata gonna be a player I'm telling you.  

 

I hope Mailata gets every opportunity to earn the starting LT position next year and going forward. He's a beast and just scratching the surface of his potential.

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

 

I'd be curious how Howie worded Peters' and Jeffery's contracts and whether or not he is calling the shots on playing time for them.

Just now, CaliEagle said:

Teams do that all the time. The NFL is about money.  If they feel he isn't healthy, but that he isn't at risk for further injury...then they will clear him. But, that doesn't mean he is 100%.

If he was at 80% I don’t think they would throw him back out there with the fact that he had a punctured lung and 11 ribs. They’re not gonna risk for the Eagles game for potentially their entire playoff run. Because I don’t think they can get through the playoffs with Hill at quarterback.

again I Think ideally they want him to get reps in this game because they need to get home-field advantage. I think they look at the Chiefs game if he comes in cold they’re at a disadvantage and they’re not up by all that much for home-field advantage in the NFC. The Packers are right behind them. But then again I don’t think they will clear him to play if he’s not close to 100%. So if he is I think it’s because he’s close enough. 80 to me isn’t close enough. 

1 minute ago, Iggles25 said:

I hope Mailata gets every opportunity to earn the starting LT position next year and going forward. He's a beast and just scratching the surface of his potential.

I agree but I still want to see what Dillard has.  If Mailata can be RT and Dillard LT, we are set for a decade.  That would be huge.

What I love about this play is the awareness.  That's what he will learn by playing.   

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

If he was at 80% I don’t think they would throw him back out there with the fact that he had a punctured lung and 11 ribs. They’re not gonna risk for the Eagles game for potentially their entire playoff run. Because I don’t think they can get through the playoffs with Hill at quarterback.

again I Think ideally they want him to get reps in this game because they need to get home-field advantage. I think they look at the Chiefs game if he comes in cold they’re at a disadvantage and they’re not up by all that much for home-field advantage in the NFC. The Packers are right behind them. But then again I don’t think they will clear him to play if he’s not close to 100%. So if he is I think it’s because he’s close enough. 80 to me isn’t close enough. 

Again, if they feel that he isn't at risk for further injuring his current injury, then they will put him out there. But, that doesn't mean he is 100% healthy and that the area isn't sore or that there isn't some affects of throwing velocity, etc.

1 hour ago, aptosbird said:

The last thing the Eagles need going into an offseason is a genuine QB controversy...choosing Hurts at this point is hard to come back from

Doug doesnt care about the offseason, if Hurts doesn't play well it will be someone else's problem to figure out

1 hour ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Sounds like a round-about way of saying, "I was stripped of my power and forced to start Hurts." 

Not that I necessarily disagree with the decision in a lost cause of a season, but the process here is as disjointed and confusing as always.

I kind of believe it was Doug's decision but I am sure Howie supported him.  I also think he's not likely causing a rift in the locker room about it either. 

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

I don’t know why you’re laughing. Again have you proven that lurie or howie didn’t make the decision? No. Amazing how you like to call people wrong yet you somehow have yet to prove anything of which you stated previously lol. Pure amazing on your end.  

I find it amazing you seemingly use your assumptions on the situations to make it as if it’s definitive fact.

Proven?  What on Earth are you talking about?  This is a Eagles fan board.  Who can prove anything with what's going on internally within the organization? 

We can use our "best guesses" but unless we are "inside the Eagles Front office" we are dealing in conjecture.  

My personal opinion is that it's likely a "team decision" based on a myriad of factors.   I could be wrong about that too.  All we are doing here is ":guessing".

 

1 minute ago, bpac55 said:

I agree but I still want to see what Dillard has.  If Mailata can be RT and Dillard LT, we are set for a decade.  That would be huge.

What I love about this play is the awareness.  That's what he will learn by playing.   

That's true. Wish there was a way to get Mailata more reps at RT this year to gain some experience at that side. Sadly though, don't think there is anyone healthy or capable enough to man LT without getting Hurts/Wentz killed.

4 hours ago, Mike31mt said:

Yeah the system with a great running game, OL, defense, and skill players making huge plays all over the field

Lets try Wentz in that system too

We did.  He was the MVP of the league.  🤣

10 minutes ago, hputenis said:

While you look in the mirror, just replace that bolded part with:

"The bizarre obsession is beyond logic or reason.  My best guess is that I might not be an Eagles fan...but primarily a Foles fan who started following the team more closely once Foles won the SB and I've cried myself to sleep every night since he's been gone."

Every "Wentz die-hard" points out numerous flaws with him and gives him a huge portion of the blame this season.  You just choose not to see it.  You take the opportunity to blast him whenever someone else is discussing the other 37 issues we currently have on offense.  

I've probably been an Eagles fan longer than you've been alive.  So that's that. 

22 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

So what happens if the offense looks better against the #1 defense? 

I don’t know if the offense looks catered to hurts.

What if we finally run the ball 30 times and give sanders 25 touched and we pass for only 100 yards. Would that not be an entirely different game plan then what the Philadelphia Eagles and what we’ve been telling you for about two months that they should run the ball with Miles Sanders be?

however I know what excuses you’re going to come up with after the Saints game if the offense doesn’t look good. The ones i just put out there are going to spew out of your mouth. 

Fan Since 1981 vs Fan Since 1986. Who wins??

Hopefully Lurie and Roseman gave Carson a reach-around while they were Fing him.

7 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

Proven?  What on Earth are you talking about?  This is a Eagles fan board.  Who can prove anything with what's going on internally within the organization? 

We can use our "best guesses" but unless we are "inside the Eagles Front office" we are dealing in conjecture.  

My personal opinion is that it's likely a "team decision" based on a myriad of factors.   I could be wrong about that too.  All we are doing here is ":guessing".

 

Lmao. Definition of politician answer. 

You come out clearly saying you were wrong( I think you can admit you put once again wrong) which was clearly a shot at me. 

When you say that statement you better have legitimate proof that they were wrong. Not the assumption you’re making and acting like that is the only truth of the matter.

Now it is: oh well we’re all just guessing it is an eagles board. So you’re guessing that you’re right and that other people are wrong. So you don’t have actual any proof to tell people they were wrong. So again great job making up narrative and going based off your assumptions as things are definitively true. 

like wow. This is the entire concussion argument we had last week where you keep making assumptions and saying them as if they are definitively true. Once again proving my point consistently every week