1 hour ago, Godfather said:

Stashing a 2nd rd pick on IR will not go over well with this fan base/ market. I don't think Jenkins last. There's been rumblings of Ertz coming back. I think McKee is the odd man out at QB

I agree with this assessment and ultimately think it would be best for Stowers development. Stowers needs practice not stashed on IR. Having Goedert and Ertz to learn from could only help. Blocking can be learned, Jenkins can hit the road. They should have no issue getting him back to the PS. I also think Mckee is the odd man out, who is trading for Dalton? Hell Mckee probably has little to no value, Dalton definitely isn't worth anything.

2 hours ago, Joe Ball said:

I’ve got some Eagle Rare but I ration it because I’ve only got one spare. Hard to find here except maybe twice a year. 9-12 year old with a bit sweeter finish is my most preferred.

I’ve become quite fond of Sazerac Rye. It has a hint of citrus to it that caught my attention.

2 hours ago, pgcd3 said:

The early days of the EMB were great. So many active users at once with multiple active topics. The good ole days lol

It still could be that way, but not enough people visit the non-Blog topics with any regularity.

2 hours ago, Chest Rockwell said:

Why again does the NFL season start on a Wednesday this year? I didn’t realize that until today.

To get an addition licensing/broadcasting payment.

2 hours ago, Godfather said:

Wednesday and Friday games are stupid

1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

To be fair, AI doesn’t prove my point, your point, or anyone else’s. Best I could do for another perspective. People can plan and revel in atrocities on Reddit, but I guess they draw the line at posting that the Eagles upgraded their roster, considering that post got me instantly banned in nearly every team sub-Reddit that it was posted.

As far as injuries are concerned, I just think it’s so hard to assume anything. 4 weeks helps, sure…and one wrong tweak while walking the dog can hurt. It’s so unpredictable that I think it’s hard to anticipate improvement across multiple oft-injured players thanks to 4 weeks.

Backup qb…yea. Our backup qb situation is "fine.” Off topic at this point, but we all liked the Nick Foles signing in 2017, as he was remembered pretty fondly. What we dont all remember is that he (understandably) took some real heat in September 2017 around final roster time because he was yet again injured and missed most of camp. There were legit doubts if he could be relied on. So that’s the all time backup QB story…someone who was capable of leading the team to anll those things…and he didn’t look so hot in September.

The only semi unique backup qb problem facing the Eagles is that their backups are very different types of QB’s than their starter….so the offense is going to change if Hurts goes down, more than just retracting into protecting a major downgrade. The Eagles aren’t the only team with that issue, but it’s something that can often be avoided. Having unproven underwhelming backup QBs is something that essentially cant be avoided.

That series of bannings is funny. Your first sentence is spot on. No clear answer. In fact multiple answers.

Just for grins, if you are willing, ask AI its opinion of your original statements

This roster has more holes than we have become accustomed to from recent Eagles rosters.

and/or

You will all hate me for saying this, but I think this is their least talented initial 53 since 2021.

1 hour ago, Iggles25 said:

@mattwill

12-5

Got it

Hope the Eagles win it in 26.

It's been so much fun watching this team the past 34 years.

You all don't know it. But this place has been a sanctuary for 15+ years.

Thanks.

4 hours ago, eagle45 said:

To be fair, AI doesn’t prove my point, your point, or anyone else’s. Best I could do for another perspective. People can plan and revel in atrocities on Reddit, but I guess they draw the line at posting that the Eagles upgraded their roster, considering that post got me instantly banned in nearly every team sub-Reddit that it was posted.

As far as injuries are concerned, I just think it’s so hard to assume anything. 4 weeks helps, sure…and one wrong tweak while walking the dog can hurt. It’s so unpredictable that I think it’s hard to anticipate improvement across multiple oft-injured players thanks to 4 weeks.

Backup qb…yea. Our backup qb situation is "fine.” Off topic at this point, but we all liked the Nick Foles signing in 2017, as he was remembered pretty fondly. What we dont all remember is that he (understandably) took some real heat in September 2017 around final roster time because he was yet again injured and missed most of camp. There were legit doubts if he could be relied on. So that’s the all time backup QB story…someone who was capable of leading the team to anll those things…and he didn’t look so hot in September.

The only semi unique backup qb problem facing the Eagles is that their backups are very different types of QB’s than their starter….so the offense is going to change if Hurts goes down, more than just retracting into protecting a major downgrade. The Eagles aren’t the only team with that issue, but it’s something that can often be avoided. Having unproven underwhelming backup QBs is something that essentially cant be avoided.

I took a few moments to slice and dice my roster spreadsheet sorting the players by age on the Offense and Defense separately. I also brought in the contract status for each player. Then I selected each position where either (A) the player filling it was old by NFL standards, or (B) the player's contract expires at the end of this season, or (C) there are health concerns for the specific player. The 21 players are as follows, with 6 on Defense and 15 on Offense.

QB 2      McKee Contract

QB 3      Dalton Contract

RB 1       Barkley  Age

RB 2       Bigsby Contract

WR 5     Brown  Both

WR 6     Moore  Contract

TE 1        Goedert  Both

TE 2        Mundt  Both

RT 1       Johnson L  Age

LT 1        Mailata  Age

OT 4       Johnson F  Both

RG 1      Steen   Contract

LG 1       Dickerson  Health

OC 1     Jurgens  Health

                                   

DT 3       Ojomo Contract

DT 4       Young  Contract

LB 1       Baun  Age

CB 3      Jones  Both

CB 4      Ringo  Contract

Safety 2   Epps  Age

6 hours ago, DEagle7 said:

Everyone just buys a ton of liquor at the edge of town. It's just fancy Wildwood.

Really almost no one does. But that is an option.

9 hours ago, Godfather said:

You think Shocker would waste his money on a Stowers jersey? He probably could get them on the market for dirt cheap anyways

He’d like you… "yo stowers more like showers cuh dat bum need to hit da showers”

9 hours ago, ToastJenkins said:

I mean this in all Seriousness, but are you on the spectrum Or something?

Not diagnosed

9 hours ago, Chest Rockwell said:

Bars and booze are both struggling. Obviously they go hand in hand but I have to think retail is way down too.

Younger generation vapes, smokes pot and wears pj’s in public.

It’s the younger generation and the increasing number of ppl taking GLP 1s or whatever.

3 hours ago, mattwill said:

I took a few moments to slice and dice my roster spreadsheet sorting the players by age on the Offense and Defense separately. I also brought in the contract status for each player. Then I selected each position where either (A) the player filling it was old by NFL standards, or (B) the player's contract expires at the end of this season, or (C) there are health concerns for the specific player. The 21 players are as follows, with 6 on Defense and 15 on Offense.

QB 2      McKee Contract

QB 3      Dalton Contract

RB 1       Barkley  Age

RB 2       Bigsby Contract

WR 5     Brown  Both

WR 6     Moore  Contract

TE 1        Goedert  Both

TE 2        Mundt  Both

RT 1       Johnson L  Age

LT 1        Mailata  Age

OT 4       Johnson F  Both

RG 1      Steen   Contract

LG 1       Dickerson  Health

OC 1     Jurgens  Health

                                   

DT 3       Ojomo Contract

DT 4       Young  Contract

LB 1       Baun  Age

CB 3      Jones  Both

CB 4      Ringo  Contract

Safety 2   Epps  Age

What does Maggie think of this roster ?

9 hours ago, Joe Ball said:

I’ve got some Eagle Rare but I ration it because I’ve only got one spare. Hard to find here except maybe twice a year. 9-12 year old with a bit sweeter finish is my most preferred.

Have you tried Still Austin yet?

Pains me that texas bourbon is that good

9 hours ago, Godfather said:

Fight me on the 13th in Lot F

Should i bring my kid?

9 hours ago, Chest Rockwell said:

I go cheap bruh.

Then go OGD 114

1 hour ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

It’s the younger generation and the increasing number of ppl taking GLP 1s or whatever.

I think it's because weed is legal in a lot more states now and more kids are realizing it's just a better drug overall if you want to hang out with friends on a Saturday night. No risky or belligerent behavior, unlikely to do something you'll regret the next morning, sensations are heightened instead of dulled, you sleep like a baby, and best of all, no hangover.

Say it ain’t so…Emmitt Smith accused of $2.5m scheme.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7558112/2026/09/02/emmitt-smith-lawsuit-solar-project-kituwah/

I hope this isn’t as cut and dry as the report makes it sound. I know Emmitt has invested in a few ventures locally over the years but this would really go against his character. I’m hoping this has more to do with business associates because on the surface it’s not a good look at this stage.

4 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

I think it's because weed is legal in a lot more states now and more kids are realizing it's just a better drug overall if you want to hang out with friends on a Saturday night. No risky or belligerent behavior, unlikely to do something you'll regret the next morning, sensations are heightened instead of dulled, you sleep like a baby, and best of all, no hangover.

About 12 years ago while in the 8th grade my son had to write a research paper and present it in front of the class for a third of his semester grade. He chose to research cannabis vs alcohol. He got an "A” but was not allowed to present his research in front of the class because the findings were pro cannabis.

57 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

Have you tried Still Austin yet?

Pains me that texas bourbon is that good

I haven’t but I will now. The brand TX bourbon is not good imo. Garrison Bro has some good expressions. Other than that I stick to Kentucky bourbon.

7 hours ago, mattwill said:

That series of bannings is funny. Your first sentence is spot on. No clear answer. In fact multiple answers.

Just for grins, if you are willing, ask AI its opinion of your original statements

This roster has more holes than we have become accustomed to from recent Eagles rosters.

and/or

You will all hate me for saying this, but I think this is their least talented initial 53 since 2021.

I pasted in a couple other takes too. I left off my relatively positive position-by-position evaluation of the defense and just kept it to the critical takes. A negative swing on offense with a positive swing on defense would probably unfairly ground the sum total towards 0. (Although that is my net opinion of the team).

ChatGPT:

es. On the same scale, I’d put this side of the argument at about –2 overall: meaning somewhat too pessimistic, but substantially closer to reality than a truly anti-Eagles take.

Claim	Score	My read
"Least talented initial 53 since 2021.”	–1	Very defensible
"More holes than recent Eagles rosters.”	0	Basically right
RT/Lane is a hole	–2	Conflates risk with an actual hole
Wicks at WR2 is a hole	0	Fair criticism
"Players nobody outside Philly values”	–5	Clearly overstated
Mundt/TE2 is a hole	–2	Real limitation, but rhetoric goes too far
Overall	–2	Pessimistic, not crazy

1. "Least talented initial 53 since 2021”

Score: –1

I actually think this is pretty close to correct.

The 2022 roster was loaded. The 2023 team entered the year with an absurd veteran core. The 2024 initial roster had AJ Brown/DeVonta/Saquon, a still-dominant OL and what became an elite young secondary. The 2025 roster retained most of that championship-level talent.

The 2026 team still has elite/high-end players — Hurts, Barkley, DeVonta, Mailata, Carter, Baun, DeJean, Mitchell, etc. — but there are more positions where you're saying "this could work” instead of "we know this is good.” The official initial 53 makes that pretty obvious at WR, TE and parts of OL.

So I wouldn't call this doomerism. 2026 being the weakest opening roster of the 2022–26 group is a perfectly reasonable position.

2. "This roster has more holes than we've become accustomed to.”

Score: 0

I think this is basically spot-on.

Importantly, that doesn't mean it's a bad roster. The Eagles' standard has become ridiculous.

The legitimate uncertainty list is something like WR2, TE2 until Calcaterra returns/develops, Lane's availability and OT contingency, some secondary depth, and possibly kicker. Even Eagles-oriented preseason analysis has been explicitly questioning WR2, TE depth and tackle availability.

That's noticeably different from some recent years where you had to work pretty hard to identify starting-level weaknesses.

---

3. "Was RT a hole last year?”

Score: –2

This is where I think he's manipulating the definition of hole a little.

Lane Johnson played only 10 games in 2025, and he's now 36. So RT availability is absolutely a legitimate concern. That's not Eagles homer hand-waving.

But:

Lane Johnson himself is not a hole.

There's a distinction between:

"We have a below-average starting RT.”

and

"We have a great RT who's 36, missed seven games last year, and whose backup situation matters a lot.”

The second is the Eagles' situation.

I'd call it a major risk point, not a roster hole.

If someone says "RT is totally fine, nothing to see here”, that's homerish.

If someone says "RT is a hole because Lane might get hurt”, that's slightly too negative.

---

4. Wicks: "Bad hands + poor speed + 332 yards = how is that NOT a hole?”

Score: 0

This is probably the strongest point in the entire argument.

Wicks ran 4.62 at the Combine. He had only 30 catches for 332 yards and 2 TDs in 2025. He also has a genuine history of drops: PFF credited him with nine in 2024 and three in 2025.

So if the proposition is:

"Dontayvion Wicks is already a demonstrated non-problematic NFL WR2.”

No. I don't buy that.

There are reasons to like him — route running, physicality after the catch, blocking, prior 581-yard rookie season — but those are reasons to believe he might outperform his recent production, not evidence that WR2 is settled.

I'd call Wicks a legitimate question mark/weakness until proven otherwise.

And there's another distinction:

Wicks can be a good acquisition AND WR2 can still be a hole.

Those aren't contradictory.

---

5. "You're assuming players no teams attribute any value to outside Philly can be meaningful starters.”

Score: –5

This is the weakest part.

It's rhetorically satisfying but factually doesn't work.

Philadelphia literally gave Green Bay a 2026 fifth-rounder and 2027 sixth-rounder for Wicks and then gave him a one-year $12.5 million extension. That's not "nobody values him.”

Mundt has survived nine NFL seasons with the Rams, Vikings and Jaguars before Philadelphia signed him. He received $750,000 guaranteed from the Eagles this offseason.

And there's actually funny contrary evidence here: four Eagles cuts were claimed onto other teams' 53s this week, the highest total in the league, including Cameron Latu and two offensive linemen.

So you can argue:

"These are marginal/questionable starters.”

Totally fair.

But "the rest of the league assigns these guys no value” is just polemical exaggeration.

---

6. The Mundt/TE2 argument

Score: –2

There's a good football point buried inside an overstatement.

He's right that the ideal TE2 isn't simply:

OL who is eligible to catch passes.

A TE who presents essentially zero receiving threat lets defenses react differently to personnel. And with Stowers struggling both as a blocker and through camp, the Eagles haven't gotten the clean complementary TE they presumably hoped for yet. That's a legitimate weakness. Recent reporting has specifically identified TE depth as an issue.

But he's underselling Mundt.

Mundt isn't just some tackle wearing No. 83. He's regarded as a very good NFL blocking TE — Philadelphia cites PFF grades of 7th among qualifying TEs in pass blocking and 9th in run blocking in 2025.

And while he's certainly not a receiving weapon, he caught 9 balls for 111 yards last year, with six producing first downs, and has 74 career receptions.

Nobody is rolling a safety over Mundt.

But defenses also can't literally treat him like Jordan Mailata.

And TE2 is one of the positions where specialization is acceptable. If Goedert is playing most obvious passing downs, Mundt's blocking has substantial value even if he's an unexciting receiver.

So I'd phrase it:

TE2 = genuine weakness/question mark.
Mundt = useful role player.
Mundt = "basically an offensive lineman” = too negative.

---

The interesting thing is where the two sides miss each other

I think the anti-homer side is much stronger on identifying weaknesses, while the homer side is stronger on recognizing that a weakness doesn't automatically equal a fatal roster hole.

For me the accurate middle ground is:

2026 is probably the least overwhelmingly talented Eagles roster entering a season since 2021. It has legitimate weaknesses at WR2 and TE2 and meaningful age/injury exposure at RT. But it's still unusually strong at premium/high-impact positions, and calling Wicks/Mundt/other complementary players "guys nobody else values” significantly overstates the case.

That's almost exactly –2 to me.

If the first person's argument you showed me was "there are literally no holes among the 24 starters,” I actually think this second person's basic roster diagnosis is considerably closer to 0 — they just periodically turn a legitimate criticism into an unnecessarily extreme one.

CLAUDE:

Alright, grading each claim on the homer scale — 0 spot on, negative = too pessimistic, positive = too rosy.

"Least talented initial 53 since 2021" — Score: -3

Directionally defensible, stated too confidently. Losing a target monster like A.J. Brown (130 targets per season and the franchise single-season receptions record) is a real talent drain, and the pass-catching group behind Smith is unproven. But this roster still has Hurts, Barkley, Smith, Carter, the full returning starting five up front, plus a Greenard trade and two premium picks (Lemon, Stowers) injected into it. Local coverage is calling the OL the deepest and most talented group the Eagles have had in years. The 2021 roster had an unproven Hurts, a rookie WR1, and Reagor/Watkins as the supporting cast — this isn't that. "Least talented since 2022 or 2023" would score closer to 0; anchoring it to 2021 overshoots. ESPNMetro Philadelphia

"More holes than we're accustomed to" — Score: -1

Basically fair. WR2/WR3 are projection, TE2 is a specialist, and the secondary is patched with one-year vets. Recent Eagles rosters didn't ask you to squint at this many spots. Nearly spot on.

"Was RT a hole last year?" (implying Lane is one now) — Score: -5

This is where you tip over. A risk is not a hole. Lane at 36 with an injury history in what's expected to be the final year of a Hall of Fame-caliber career is a legitimate durability concern — but when healthy he's still a top-shelf RT, and the swing depth behind him is better than it's been. Treating age/injury probability as equivalent to a talent deficiency is the pessimist's version of homerism. NBC Sports Philadelphia

Wicks as a hole (bad hands, poor speed, 332 yards) — Score: -3

Half right. The drops are real and documented, the long speed is ordinary, and the production is genuinely thin — that's why "question mark" is the correct label. But two things cut against "hole": he's 25 with legit separation/route-running traits that got buried in a crowded Green Bay room, and your next claim is factually undercut by his own acquisition —

"Players no team outside Philly attributes value to" — Score: -4

This one's just wrong for Wicks specifically. The Eagles sent a 2026 fifth and a 2027 sixth for him and he signed a one-year, $12.5 million extension worth up to $14.75M. That's a real market price for a projected starter, not a scrap-heap flyer. Now, Hollywood Brown and Elijah Moore on one-year prove-it deals? That's the profile you're describing, and if you'd aimed the claim there it scores near 0. Aiming it at the WR2 misses. CBSSports.com

The Mundt/TE2 argument — Score: -3

Your logic is actually sound in the abstract: a TE with zero route credibility lets defenses treat 12 personnel as a run tell, and "if he's purely a blocker he's just a sixth lineman" is a fair jab. Where it overreaches is treating TE2 as a starter-level hole. Mundt is a ~300-snap role player behind Goedert, signed specifically because he's a blocker with familiarity in the new offensive system — that's a scheme-fit depth signing, not a spot the offense lives or dies on. And the Stowers comparison is a training-camp snapshot of a second-round rookie who had a rough camp and a hamstring injury, not his established level. TE2 is a mild weakness, not a hole. NBC10 PhiladelphiaNBC10 Philadelphia

Overall: -3

You're not being irrational — the concerns are the right concerns (pass-catcher proven production, age at RT, thin margins if injuries hit). The pattern that drags you negative is converting every risk into a hole and every unproven player into a proven negative. The honest version of this roster is: high floor in the trenches and backfield, unusually wide error bars in the passing game. That's a "we'll know by Halloween" roster, not a 2021 rebuild roster.

The prompt:

Alright can you do the -10 to +10 analysis again, 0 being spot on, +10 being homertastic, -10 being horribly negative. Assess the following relative to recent years:

I think this is their least talented initial 53 since 2021. This roster has more holes than we have become accustomed to from recent Eagles rosters. Was RT a hole last year? (Referencing Lane Johnson and age/injury history). How is a WR2 that mixes bad hands, poor speed, and minimal productivity (332 yards you gave me the stats) NOT a hole? (referencing Wicks)

You are making assumptions that players no teams attribute any value to outside of Philly can be meaningful non problematic starters here.

If TE2 was a pure in line blocker then they’d be an OL. Just as receiving from a TE isn’t that valuable if they can’t be at least a viable blocker, blocking from a TE isn’t that viable if they can’t command some level of coverage should they actually run a route. And a TE that is as effective receiving as Stowers is blocking doesn’t exactly fit that bill. (referencing TE2 Mundt).

We aren't at the point where AI should be settling any debates.

But...I do feel this is our least talented roster since 2021 with the most questions heading into the season. Teams have won the SB with rosters less talented than they had in previous years. It doesn't mean they are dead on arrival.

I will throw in one other negative take...this offense is an unknown...to everyone including Howie, Siri, Mannion, and Hurts. They absolutely could surprise us all (and the sky is the limit for this team with a good offense). BUT...I don't think the smart money is on that happening. I do feel the personnel/talent level on offense has had a critical shift towards mediocrity. And I think it is entirely possible that this offense could be worse than last year, whereas almost every single other person tossing in opinions labels that as an impossibility. I see a very deep, low downside for this offense. Not predicting it. But there are a wide range of possibilities here with no safety net. I think it's going to require an against-the-odds and unexpected massive boost from the OL staying healthy all year and someone like Wicks being a WR Baun (not seeing that) or Barkley somehow repeating 2024.

My prediction for this season is Greenard will have less sacks this year for thr Eagles than Brandon Graham did for the Eagles last year.