9 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

As a comp:

Aikman was 4th in the NFL in passing yards. Hurts was 16th.

Aikman was 6th in passing yards per game. Hurts was 22nd (!!)

Regardless of the stage of NFL offense and defense, styles, and rules, wins and losses are context-independent. Troy Aikman was on a very talented team. His W-L record is 105-75 or 58%. Jalen Hurts is 63-29, 69%. This seems like an endless discussion on style points. Not enough Josh Allen wow moments, not enough Herbert perfect passes, not enough Lamar Jackson miracle plays. These are Moneyball arguments. So Hurts leads the lead in walks, and because of this, he has the best on-base percentage and ends up with the most runs scored, but he's boring and doesn't get us out of our seats enough. The guy wins. That is a fact, and if you watch a lot of football, other teams like the Bills, Bengals, and Ravens, the oohs and aahs get old when it always comes up short. As an Eagles fan, I'm GD happy we have Jalen Hurts and count my lucky stars that the team replaced Ginger Moron with a second-rounder who has taken the team to two SBs.

28 minutes ago, Next_Up said:

Regardless of the stage of NFL offense and defense, styles, and rules, wins and losses are context-independent. Troy Aikman was on a very talented team. His W-L record is 105-75 or 58%. Jalen Hurts is 63-29, 69%. This seems like an endless discussion on style points. Not enough Josh Allen wow moments, not enough Herbert perfect passes, not enough Lamar Jackson miracle plays. These are Moneyball arguments. So Hurts leads the lead in walks, and because of this, he has the best on-base percentage and ends up with the most runs scored, but he's boring and doesn't get us out of our seats enough. The guy wins. That is a fact, and if you watch a lot of football, other teams like the Bills, Bengals, and Ravens, the oohs and aahs get old when it always comes up short. As an Eagles fan, I'm GD happy we have Jalen Hurts and count my lucky stars that the team replaced Ginger Moron with a second-rounder who has taken the team to two SBs.

It really is for both sides

Constantly seeing Hurts get compared to top QBs in some type of way. Though most of the time it's not player vs player stats

Christ. There are people trying to assert that Hurts is a better passing QB than Troy Aikman? We’ve officially jumped the shark at this point.

The simple fact that an unbiased argument about Hurts puts him perhaps in the top 10 NFL QBs after being in two Super Bowls pretty much says he’s a product of the overall roster.

The main accolade for Hurts is that he has been in 2 SBs and has been outstanding in both.

Some players lack the capacity to perform at their baseline on that stage, let alone exceed it. The bigger the stage, the more confident you can be Hurts will play to his potential.

The net winning % does very little for me. That’s a function of spending his entire starting career on the most talented roster in the NFL. Dismissing his undeniable passing deficiencies as mere style points also doesn’t paint the right picture.

1 minute ago, Alphagrand said:

Christ. There are people trying to assert that Hurts is a better passing QB than Troy Aikman? We’ve officially jumped the shark at this point.

The simple fact that an unbiased argument about Hurts puts him perhaps in the top 10 NFL QBs after being in two Super Bowls pretty much says he’s a product of the overall roster.

One of the biggest Jalen Hurts haters throwing a fit because people defend him.

9 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

Christ. There are people trying to assert that Hurts is a better passing QB than Troy Aikman? We’ve officially jumped the shark at this point.

The simple fact that an unbiased argument about Hurts puts him perhaps in the top 10 NFL QBs after being in two Super Bowls pretty much says he’s a product of the overall roster.

In no way did what I posted say that Hurts is a better passing QB than Aikman. The comparison was winning percentage. Congratulations on winning the Straw Man Fallacy award.

1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

As a comp:

Aikman was 4th in the NFL in passing yards. Hurts was 16th.

Aikman was 6th in passing yards per game. Hurts was 22nd (!!)

Emmitt Smith carried that team. Comparable rosters between the JJ cowpads and the Birds with Hurts. Under your argument, Hank Fraley was a better C than Concrete Charlie. That Deacon Jones sacks don’t count because of the head slap move he used on occasion. The only stats that really matter are in the Win/Loss column. Hurts understands that.

36 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

Christ. There are people trying to assert that Hurts is a better passing QB than Troy Aikman? We’ve officially jumped the shark at this point.

The simple fact that an unbiased argument about Hurts puts him perhaps in the top 10 NFL QBs after being in two Super Bowls pretty much says he’s a product of the overall roster.

Did you watch Aikman? He wasn’t an awesome passer.

43 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

The main accolade for Hurts is that he has been in 2 SBs and has been outstanding in both.

Some players lack the capacity to perform at their baseline on that stage, let alone exceed it. The bigger the stage, the more confident you can be Hurts will play to his potential.

The net winning % does very little for me. That’s a function of spending his entire starting career on the most talented roster in the NFL. Dismissing his undeniable passing deficiencies as mere style points also doesn’t paint the right picture.

Who is dismissing his faults? Must be wonderful for you to go through life without any. But net winning % does very little for you. Seems like your ideal team is a Brett Favre type throwing to super fast WRs that can’t run routes or catch.

47 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

The main accolade for Hurts is that he has been in 2 SBs and has been outstanding in both.

Some players lack the capacity to perform at their baseline on that stage, let alone exceed it. The bigger the stage, the more confident you can be Hurts will play to his potential.

The net winning % does very little for me. That’s a function of spending his entire starting career on the most talented roster in the NFL. Dismissing his undeniable passing deficiencies as mere style points also doesn’t paint the right picture.

The most frustrating thing about Hurts is that he played so well in those games, and that's pretty much it. He's Eli Manning, average in the regular season but won on the biggest stage so people argue he's elite. So just remember if someone thinks Hurts is an elite QB they also think Eli was elite.

32 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Who is dismissing his faults? Must be wonderful for you to go through life without any. But net winning % does very little for you. Seems like your ideal team is a Brett Favre type throwing to super fast WRs that can’t run routes or catch.

His passing deficiencies were specifically labeled as style points in this very discussion.

Calling an argument a straw man is a tired cliche on message boards, but that's beneath you.

Man, coming here to talk about the Flyers is just so boring with the Hurts conversation that literally hasn't changed for years. One day, our QBs will suck so bad there won't be a reason to talk about them. And the next generation in here will whimsically reminisce about the Hurts era.

16 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

Man, coming here to talk about the Flyers is just so boring with the Hurts conversation that literally hasn't changed for years. One day, our QBs will suck so bad there won't be a reason to talk about them. And the next generation in here will whimsically reminisce about the Hurts era.

This era of eagles football is great but Hurts has very little to do with that. Over time, his mediocrity is starting to become clear to more and more people. When reminiscing about this era, it wont be about Hurts. It will be this era of defense, Fangio, and the historically great head coach.

11 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

This era of eagles football is great but Hurts has very little to do with that.

What other leaders have stood out on this team --- especially since Jason Kelce retired? Hurts may be on the mild-mannered side as the de facto team leader, but it's his words and catch phrases that you hear the teammates repeating in interviews. He has everyone's ear when he talks. Hurts has a lot to do with the state of this team and what it has accomplished. On the days he stinks, we lose. We don't lose often.

1 minute ago, brkmsn said:

What other leaders have stood out on this team --- especially since Jason Kelce retired? Hurts may be on the mild-mannered side as the de facto team leader, but it's his words and catch phrases that you hear the teammates repeating in interviews. He has everyone's ear when he talks. Hurts has a lot to do with the state of this team and what it has accomplished. On the days he stinks, we lose. We don't lose often.

On the days he stinks, we also win. Because he has little to do with our wins. Mostly, we win in spite of him.

Just now, HazletonEagle said:

On the days he stinks, we also win. Because he has little to do with our wins. Mostly, we win in spite of him.

I completely disagree.

1 minute ago, brkmsn said:

I completely disagree.

thats alright.

1 minute ago, HazletonEagle said:

thats alright.

I know.

It just comes down to bias on both sides. Some of the same arguments people use against Hurts, if you were to look at some other QBs you could make the same arguments but the Hurts "haters" will find a way to rationalize or dismiss the inconsistent logic. Same with extreme Hurts homers, who cherry pick stats or find obscure random stats, use limited time frames that make him look better and other things like that.

People just can't acknowledge pros and cons and take a balanced view. He's got strengths and weaknesses. He's had wow moments and dumb moments. He's made great throws, and missed open receivers. He's taken dumb sacks or thrown bad interceptions. He's made great deep passes, led comeback wins, and made impressive throws. He doesn't rack up passing yards. He can run, but he's also not really that fast of a runner. He doesn't do well with OC's that don't know what they're doing, he has to trust the coaching and struggles when he isn't led well by his coach. He is clutch in big games and doesn't let mistakes rattle him, he bounces right back. He was MVP runner up after Mahomes, and played better than Mahomes in the first SB, which he would have been MVP had they won and it would have been accepted that he was MVP. In the 2nd SB, the defense was the main reason they won but it was the entire unit so they went with the QB...who did play great when Spags defense shut down Barkley (who did make some key plays though), and Hurts made great throws including the epic dagger. All of things things can be true at the same time.

The arguments are so tired at this point. And it's not just Hurts. Eagles fans have been divided on every QB in my lifetime. There's a reason for the quote "the most popular player in Philadelphia is the backup QB."

The extreme takes on both sides are actually quite pathetic. The team has won 2 Super Bowls within 7 years of each other after a long drought, but some fans post like we're the Jets or Browns.

Another year... and its still the same arguments with the same players taking their traditional roles.

19 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

This era of eagles football is great but Hurts has very little to do with that. Over time, his mediocrity is starting to become clear to more and more people. When reminiscing about this era, it wont be about Hurts. It will be this era of defense, Fangio, and the historically great head coach.

You're so wrong I feel guilty even telling you how wrong you are. It will be about all of it. Defense, Saquon's huge season, Stoutland, Brown coming then going, DeJean's rookie season, is Mitchell the Eagles greatest CB ever, the Carter end result, and so much more. And, of course, the Hurts era. He is already 5th all-time games played for Eagles QBs. Like it or not, this is his era. Sometimes I like it, sometimes I don't, but this is the Hurts era. It will be remembered that way. And when we have a run of bad QBs like we did after Cunningham in the 90s, people will reminisce about Hurts the way we did about Jaws, who was painfully mediocre. Just the way it will be.

6 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

You're so wrong I feel guilty even telling you how wrong you are. It will be about all of it. Defense, Saquon's huge season, Stoutland, Brown coming then going, DeJean's rookie season, is Mitchell the Eagles greatest CB ever, the Carter end result, and so much more. And, of course, the Hurts era. He is already 5th all-time games played for Eagles QBs. Like it or not, this is his era. Sometimes I like it, sometimes I don't, but this is the Hurts era. It will be remembered that way. And when we have a run of bad QBs like we did after Cunningham in the 90s, people will reminisce about Hurts the way we did about Jaws, who was painfully mediocre. Just the way it will be.

Probably not.

13 minutes ago, NOTW said:

It just comes down to bias on both sides. Some of the same arguments people use against Hurts, if you were to look at some other QBs you could make the same arguments but the Hurts "haters" will find a way to rationalize or dismiss the inconsistent logic. Same with extreme Hurts homers, who cherry pick stats or find obscure random stats, use limited time frames that make him look better and other things like that.

People just can't acknowledge pros and cons and take a balanced view. He's got strengths and weaknesses. He's had wow moments and dumb moments. He's made great throws, and missed open receivers. He's taken dumb sacks or thrown bad interceptions. He's made great deep passes, led comeback wins, and made impressive throws. He doesn't rack up passing yards. He can run, but he's also not really that fast of a runner. He doesn't do well with OC's that don't know what they're doing, he has to trust the coaching and struggles when he isn't led well by his coach. He is clutch in big games and doesn't let mistakes rattle him, he bounces right back. He was MVP runner up after Mahomes, and played better than Mahomes in the first SB, which he would have been MVP had they won and it would have been accepted that he was MVP. In the 2nd SB, the defense was the main reason they won but it was the entire unit so they went with the QB...who did play great when Spags defense shut down Barkley (who did make some key plays though), and Hurts made great throws including the epic dagger. All of things things can be true at the same time.

The arguments are so tired at this point. And it's not just Hurts. Eagles fans have been divided on every QB in my lifetime. There's a reason for the quote "the most popular player in Philadelphia is the backup QB."

The extreme takes on both sides are actually quite pathetic. The team has won 2 Super Bowls within 7 years of each other after a long drought, but some fans post like we're the Jets or Browns.

A majority of interceptions thrown are "bad." Only the ones that are on target and bounce off the receiver's hands would not get that label and obviously all QBs throw INTs. Dumb sacks? Other QBs aren't immune to those either.

1 hour ago, devpool said:

The most frustrating thing about Hurts is that he played so well in those games, and that's pretty much it. He's Eli Manning, average in the regular season but won on the biggest stage so people argue he's elite. So just remember if someone thinks Hurts is an elite QB they also think Eli was elite.

Eli would be ranked much higher on that ESPN list today given the state of QB play across the league. He was playing in a time of much better QBs. He wasn't elite, neither is Hurts. Without looking at Eli's stats to compare, it's not a bad comparison for fan reaction. Not the best QB or elite, but gets the job done. Hurts has been to two SBs and won a SB, why are fans so angry about that LOL. Some of the QBs ranked higher on that recent list haven't won shite. We say it's a team sport and wins are a team stat when talking about Hurts but not other QBs.

It's disingenuous for you to repeatedly say he's only played 3 good games in his career. Come on. Season stats have been middle of the pack in passing most seasons, the rushing stats have been impressive, but he has had some big regular season games, including a perfect game last season, and big games despite one of his 2 top WRs out with injury. (Note: I'm not arguing, nor have I ever, that Hurts is elite. As a passer, he's around 12-15 but you add the running success, the clutch and winning and I think the total package puts him as a top 10.)

Looking at Pro Football Reference and just sorting all of his career games by passing yards as a start, you see that he's had regular season games that are better performance stat-wise than the playoff wins that you claim are his only 3 good games in his career.

It's interesting that his most passing yards was in 2021 when he was a first year starter, his receivers were rookie DeVonta Smith, Jalen Reagor and Quez Watkins. 2 other games in his top 5 pass yards were in his rookie season in 2020, coming in for Wentz in a lame duck losing season. His receivers were Jalen Reagor, Quez Watkins and Greg Ward. "But he can only succeed with great talent around him" is the argument.

Sorting his playoff games by pass yards, 2 of the games where you said he played horribly in a playoff exits were his 2nd and 3rd best pass yard playoff games. I'm not arguing he played great in those games, but pass yards is a stat most people use to rank him low compared to other QBs so just using that for easy sorting. Obviously passer rating, TDs, INTs, etc. are factors.

Unless this new offense clicks and suits him really well and he excels, he's never going to be a top passer in the league. He's never going to have the kind of passing game that is good enough for the critics and fans who just hate him. If his running ability diminishes, that takes away the dynamic of his dual threat and hurts the offense overall. So we'll see what happens this year. But he's just a QB who isn't going to be a top 5 passer. But it's also unfair and simply wrong to just dismiss the good things he does achieve, the impressive games and throws and say he's only played 3 good games.

I don't get the need from fans of our own team to spend energy downplaying the accomplishments of our own QB. You expect that from fans of other teams.

16 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

You're so wrong I feel guilty even telling you how wrong you are. It will be about all of it. Defense, Saquon's huge season, Stoutland, Brown coming then going, DeJean's rookie season, is Mitchell the Eagles greatest CB ever, the Carter end result, and so much more. And, of course, the Hurts era. He is already 5th all-time games played for Eagles QBs. Like it or not, this is his era. Sometimes I like it, sometimes I don't, but this is the Hurts era. It will be remembered that way. And when we have a run of bad QBs like we did after Cunningham in the 90s, people will reminisce about Hurts the way we did about Jaws, who was painfully mediocre. Just the way it will be.

Some people will never change their opinion no matter what. If Hurts plays great this year, they will just credit Mannion and Grizzard and the supporting cast. If he plays badly, they'll celebrate it while the "Hurts huggers" will make excuses and it will be a long offseason again.

There was like a nice 48 hour period after the SB win where people liked Hurts. That was short lived.