1 minute ago, EazyEaglez said:

There is a stigma and bias towards the player that clearly wasn’t placed on the previous quarterback who couldn’t stay healthy, rarely won against upper echelon teams, cried his way out of town, and never won a playoff game. People gave that dude all kinds of leeway even before his best season. Heck they gave that guy more leeway than 27-2/HOF/SB MVP Foles. 

A lot of that has to do with where he was drafted and the enormous amount of resources dumped into him. Then to show what he did in his second year, yeah it's going to be hard for people to accept that he isn't anything we thought he was going to be.

A guy like that failing is hard to come to terms with. It's not good for the team the franchise or the fans. Not getting anything back from a guy that you put everything into sets the franchise back for who the hell knows how long? It puts people in denial and makes them defensive because none of us want to be in QB hell for 10 yrs. 

It's not as simple as well Carson sucked time to move on and see what we can get out of a guy we only spent an unnecessary 2nd round pick on. 

There is a ton of reasons why people are not moving on. It took me awhile to wrap my head around this as well. 

1 hour ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

A lot of that has to do with where he was drafted and the enormous amount of resources dumped into him. Then to show what he did in his second year, yeah it's going to be hard for people to accept that he isn't anything we thought he was going to be.

A guy like that failing is hard to come to terms with. It's not good for the team the franchise or the fans. Not getting anything back from a guy that you put everything into sets the franchise back for who the hell knows how long? It puts people in denial and makes them defensive because none of us want to be in QB hell for 10 yrs. 

It's not as simple as well Carson sucked time to move on and see what we can get out of a guy we only spent an unnecessary 2nd round pick on. 

There is a ton of reasons why people are not moving on. It took me awhile to wrap my head around this as well. 

This is the NFL and we gotta move one. We were wrong about the other guy period. With that being the case moving on from that guy or even wanting to hold onto him shouldn’t effect how people view Jalen, but it clearly does. One guy around here actually wrote he hated Jalen Hurts when he was drafted, because he was drafted! I personally didn’t like the pick, but I wasn’t angry at Hurts. He didn’t pick himself. Quarterback purgatory is a perspective. Basically we were in QB purgatory with McNabb especially for those who realized that we weren’t going to win with that guy. So just because you have that "franchise quarterback” it doesn’t mean that you team is going anywhere with that player. Stafford was in Detroit for a long time. It didn’t help them win anything. Meanwhile the Bucs get Brady and they are champs. In the end for me I don’t get the love affair for Wentz. Then again I had to deal with losing Reggie White, Brian Dawkins, and the untimely death of Jerome Brown. To me Wentz ain’t on their level so losing him is nothing to me. 

6 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

This is the NFL and we gotta move one. We were wrong about the other guy period. With that being the case moving on from that guy or even wanting to hold onto him shouldn’t effect how people view Jalen, but it clearly does. One guy around here actually wrote he hated Jalen Hurts when he was drafted, because he was drafted! I personally didn’t like the pick, but I wasn’t angry at Hurts. He didn’t pick himself. Quarterback purgatory is a perspective. Basically we were in QB purgatory with McNabb especially for those who realized that we weren’t going to win with that guy. So just because you have that "franchise quarterback” it doesn’t mean that you team is going anywhere with that player. Stafford was in Detroit for a long time. It didn’t help them win anything. Meanwhile the Bucs get Brady and they are champs. In the end for me I don’t get the love affair for Wentz. Then again I had to deal with losing Reggie White, Brian Dawkins, and the untimely death of Jerome Brown. To me Wentz ain’t on their level so losing him is nothing to me. 

And we are still suffering since McNabb left. No one wants to deal.with it any longer. 

I'm over it, im just giving some insight that everyone thinks differently and have different reasons as to why they are not letting it go. 

11 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

And we are still suffering since McNabb left. No one wants to deal.with it any longer. 

I'm over it, im just giving some insight that everyone thinks differently and have different reasons as to why they are not letting it go. 

Bro we won the Super Bowl after McNabb left. Maybe just maybe if the Eagles actually committed themselves to Nick Foles (and his 21-11 record as the Eagles quarterback) instead of falling for Mark Sanchez (4-6), Mike Vick ( 20-20), Sam Bradford ( 7-7), and Carson Wentz (35-32) we might have won more Super Bowls. We spent all that time 1st round pick quarterback chasing and it all basically led to a barely over .500 team. 

2 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

Bro we won the Super Bowl after McNabb left. Maybe just maybe if the Eagles actually committed themselves to Nick Foles (and his 21-11 record as the Eagles quarterback) instead of falling for Mark Sanchez (4-6), Mike Vick ( 20-20), Sam Bradford ( 7-7), and Carson Wentz (35-32) we might have won more Super Bowls. We spent all that time 1st round pick quarterback chasing and it all basically led to a barely over .500 team. 

I don't think we win anything with Nick as a full time starter. He has proven he isn't consistent enough for that. 

3 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

I don't think we win anything with Nick as a full time starter. He has proven he isn't consistent enough for that. 

None of those 1st round quarterbacks were consistent enough. Nick Foles is the only quarterback with playoff victories since McNabb. Look at their records. Tell me who actually won other than Foles. 

1 minute ago, EazyEaglez said:

None of those 1st round quarterbacks were consistent enough. Nick Foles is the only quarterback with playoff victories since McNabb. Look at their records. Tell me who actually won other than Foles. 

Sure

4 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

Sure

I know the Wentz wagon made us delusional. Truth is the team declined with him as the starter. Complicating things further was when he got the contract, but also them investing so much into him they couldn’t afford to build the team around him well enough. The team has been in decline since 2017. We were going nowhere and our franchise quarterback wasn’t good enough to make the guys around him better. Getting back to Hurts though. People can’t allow their delusions of the fake grandeur that we supposedly lost with 3 win Wentz last season to overshadow giving this kid a chance. 

3 hours ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

That's because he is falling into the Nick Foles category.... When he is good he is really good and when he is bad he looks like he never played a game in his life . 

He's a rookie still... Let's give him some time to see if he can correct that. 

1 minute ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

He's a rookie still... Let's give him some time to see if he can correct that. 

He's not a rookie

1 hour ago, EazyEaglez said:

There is a stigma and bias towards the player that clearly wasn’t placed on the previous quarterback who couldn’t stay healthy, rarely won against upper echelon teams, cried his way out of town, and never won a playoff game. People gave that dude all kinds of leeway even before his best season. Heck they gave that guy more leeway than 27-2/HOF/SB MVP Foles. 

That's hard to argue against bud. I mean hey I was one of those who rooted until the end for Wentz but in the end I saw that he was not the guy. And maybe Hurts isn't either. There's a very good chance he's not in fact. But I'm not ready to write him off just yet. 

Just now, Bwestbrook36 said:

He's not a rookie

He pretty much is a rookie. He was the back up last year for a team that was all Carson. He's played 8 games. He's still a rookie.

1 minute ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

That's hard to argue against bud. I mean hey I was one of those who rooted until the end for Wentz but in the end I saw that he was not the guy. And maybe Hurts isn't either. There's a very good chance he's not in fact. But I'm not ready to write him off just yet. 

He pretty much is a rookie. He was the back up last year for a team that was all Carson. He's played 8 games. He's still a rookie.

He sat on an NFL bench learn and also play some for an entire season. He isn't a rookie period. 

1 minute ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

He sat on an NFL bench learn and also play some for an entire season. He isn't a rookie period. 

Pat Mahomes sat for a year and then when he started the following year it came with the tag of "he's essentially a rookie". People talk about QBs taking a leap from year one to two and then two to three. So let's give Hurts some time to see if he can improve his weaknesses. Maybe he can, maybe he can't. 

Just now, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Pat Mahomes sat for a year and then when he started the following year it came with the tag of "he's essentially a rookie". People talk about QBs taking a leap from year one to two and then two to three. So let's give Hurts some time to see if he can improve his weaknesses. Maybe he can, maybe he can't. 

So is Dillard a rookie then? He has started even less games

2 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

So is Dillard a rookie then? He has started even less games

Dillard is not a rookie he's in year 3! Now you're just being ridiculous.

Just now, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Dillard is not a rookie he's in year 3! Now you're just being ridiculous.

Your standards for being a rookie is how many starts they had isn't it? Im not even talking about Hurts at all in my discussion. You just decided to jump in and say he was a rookie when he isn't. He played in and started games in his first year. 

Just now, Bwestbrook36 said:

Your standards for being a rookie is how many starts they had isn't it? Im not even talking about Hurts at all in my discussion. You just decided to jump in and say he was a rookie when he isn't. He played in and started games in his first year. 

Oh did I say that? On no wait I didn't. I said starts and he sat all of last year. So this is year two in the league but technically his first as a starter. The two COMBINED essentially make him like a rookie. Dillard is in year 3.

4 hours ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

That's because he is falling into the Nick Foles category.... When he is good he is really good and when he is bad he looks like he never played a game in his life . 

Ok let’s forget about 2020 for a minute. The situation he was thrown into as a rookie was absurd. I won’t even consider it when judging him. 
 

Let’s look at just this season. In four games I would say he was great in one (Atlanta), very good in one (KC), average in one (SF) and awful in one (Dallas).  I don’t see this all-or-nothing thing you’re talking about. 
 

We will learn more as the year goes on,  but I think he’s done well this season. Especially when you consider the circumstance of a rookie HC, who called what 12 running plays in the last two games COMBINED? Add in that his receivers are young and still learning on the job (with more experience chances are Smith won’t be letting DBs force him out of bounds like on the long TD that was called back). 
 

People seem to be expecting the kid to perform like an experienced vet when he’s started a grand total of 8 games in his career. 

2 minutes ago, nipples said:

Ok let’s forget about 2020 for a minute. The situation he was thrown into as a rookie was absurd. I won’t even consider it when judging him. 
 

Let’s look at just this season. In four games I would say he was great in one (Atlanta), very good in one (KC), average in one (SF) and awful in one (Dallas).  I don’t see this all-or-nothing thing you’re talking about. 
 

We will learn more as the year goes on,  but I think he’s done well this season. Especially when you consider the circumstance of a rookie HC, who called what 12 running plays in the last two games COMBINED? Add in that his receivers are young and still learning on the job (with more experience chances are Smith won’t be letting DBs force him out of bounds like on the long TD that was called back). 
 

People seem to be expecting the kid to perform like an experienced vet when he’s started a grand total of 8 games in his career. 

I don't expect perfection from him at all but calling him a rookie is ridiculous. He was able to learn from the bench which is rare these days. 

4 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Oh did I say that? On no wait I didn't. I said starts and he sat all of last year. So this is year two in the league but technically his first as a starter. The two COMBINED essentially make him like a rookie. Dillard is in year 3.

Just trying to figure out where we draw the line one what makes someone a rookie. Mahomes didn't play any games his " rookie " year" he got to learn the same way hurts did from the bench that is extremely valuable and that makes him not a rookie. 

Just now, Bwestbrook36 said:

Just trying to figure out where we draw the line one what makes someone a rookie. Mahomes didn't play any games his " rookie " year" he got to learn the same way hurts did from the bench that is extremely valuable and that makes him not a rookie. 

How about this... He's played 3 and a half games more than Lawrence, Jones and Wilson. He's played significantly 11 fewer games than Herbert? He's played fewer games than Burrows who tore his ACL last year. All of whom are still going through growing pains due to inexperience. So ok you don't want him to be labeled as a rookie then he's inexperienced. 

45 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

That's hard to argue against bud. I mean hey I was one of those who rooted until the end for Wentz but in the end I saw that he was not the guy. And maybe Hurts isn't either. There's a very good chance he's not in fact. But I'm not ready to write him off just yet. 

He pretty much is a rookie. He was the back up last year for a team that was all Carson. He's played 8 games. He's still a rookie.

I don’t know if Hurts is or isn’t the guy, but I’m being patient with him just like the Eagles are. With that being the case I’ve seen a lot of so called guys fail to get the job done while the castoff guy (Nick Foles) got us that ring. Having Hurts on that rookie deal sure could make it a lot easier to build a team around him especially with those draft picks. 

46 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Pat Mahomes sat for a year and then when he started the following year it came with the tag of "he's essentially a rookie". People talk about QBs taking a leap from year one to two and then two to three. So let's give Hurts some time to see if he can improve his weaknesses. Maybe he can, maybe he can't. 

Pat Mahomes was also afforded the opportunity to sit and learn/develop with the same coaching staff. Hurts was thrown into a no win situation with a lame duck coach and a series of offensive coaches where nobody knew who was supposed to do what. Wentz suffered in the same trash can situation and he’s a veteran. Now Hurts is learning a new system with a coaching staff barely older than he is. If anyone thinks this is fair then they’re lying to themselves. Give Hurts time to develop. These coaches as well. 

57 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Dillard is not a rookie he's in year 3! Now you're just being ridiculous.

Who has more career starts, Hurts or Dillard ??

Will you guys stop bickering? This is getting ridiculous. Look, the quarterback position is a whole 'nother thing. Eight starts is not enough to judge by, or to give one real NFL experience. And he has done fairly well with that, and also with what he's had to work with.