5 minutes ago, Swoop said:

Again I ask, where is the improvement?

Is there any reason why you go for the first 8 games now?

And why are you trying so hard to convince others that Hurts isn‘t a good QB? 

Looks to me like we will see Hurts for the rest of this season and probably next year too. So we‘ll have a good idea if he is the guy or not.

5 minutes ago, Infam said:

Is there any reason why you go for the first 8 games now?

And why are you trying so hard to convince others that Hurts isn‘t a good QB? 

Looks to me like we will see Hurts for the rest of this season and probably next year too. So we‘ll have a good idea if he is the guy or not.

Because he's had his "first season" completed so I broke it into two halves.

I am convincing people because the issues that he has had, in large, have gone unchanged.

Like I said, where is the improvement?

3 hours ago, Swoop said:

His fumbling has definitely gotten better. You're one billion percent right there.

Every other aspect of his game is virtually the same. His completion percentage is marginally better (as of now), but he's also barely throwing the ball and even those are usually short passes. 

This isn't just about the Giants game. He started the year off well and has been gross ever since. Since week 4, he has more rushing TDs than passing TDs. As is, in his last 8 starts he has 6 touchdowns (passing), 6 interceptions and a 57% completion percentage.

It's a problem.

I was a little concerned the weeks following the Atlanta game because there didn't seem to be any noticeable improvement. He was making certain situational awareness mistakes over and over that had me concerned. Then he finally showed glimpses of improved play. There was a stretch where his accuracy was much better. The team seemed to embrace his leadership and overall, the team's direction seemed better. 

 

I'm not overly concerned whether he passes for a TD, runs for a TD or someone else runs for a TD. There was that one TD to Goedert that was ruled down at the one, that should have been challenged, but instead we hurried to the line to punch it in with Hurts. Either way it's a TD --- it just happened to end up on his rushing stat instead of his passing stat. We are 7th in Red Zone offense this year --- way up from last year

 

As for his stat lines being "a problem," I will counter with "not if we are winning."

3 hours ago, E-A-G-L-E-S Eagles said:

Does this mean that he is no longer a "rookie" and we can move on from that excuse?

He gets 2 rookie years

23 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

I was a little concerned the weeks following the Atlanta game because there didn't seem to be any noticeable improvement. He was making certain situational awareness mistakes over and over that had me concerned. Then he finally showed glimpses of improved play. There was a stretch where his accuracy was much better. The team seemed to embrace his leadership and overall, the team's direction seemed better. 

 

I'm not overly concerned whether he passes for a TD, runs for a TD or someone else runs for a TD. There was that one TD to Goedert that was ruled down at the one, that should have been challenged, but instead we hurried to the line to punch it in with Hurts. Either way it's a TD --- it just happened to end up on his rushing stat instead of his passing stat. We are 7th in Red Zone offense this year --- way up from last year

 

As for his stat lines being "a problem," I will counter with "not if we are winning."

As it's been pointed out, teams that have a QB that rely that heavily on running never win. As the Giants game showed, at some point you're going to have to pass. Even ignoring that, his play has dropped in nearly every way.

My other post that you chose to ignore illustrates this. From his first 8 starts to these past 8, he has fallen off in nearly every way. Fewer passing yards, fewer passing TDs, fewer rushing yards, and a lower QB rating.

The team as a whole is better than last year. The line is stronger, the team (overall) is healthier, the weapons are slightly better. The QB play isn't the worst in football. The team winning more games is because the team as a whole is better and has played a fairly easy schedule. 

He's had two offseasons (albeit the first was a bad one), got to sit and watch last year (while also taking snaps) and is in his second year. Like I keep asking where has Hurts shown this big improvement? 

4 minutes ago, Swoop said:

As it's been pointed out, teams that have a QB that rely that heavily on running never win. As the Giants game showed, at some point you're going to have to pass. Even ignoring that, his play has dropped in nearly every way.

My other post that you chose to ignore illustrates this. From his first 8 starts to these past 8, he has fallen off in nearly every way. Fewer passing yards, fewer passing TDs, fewer rushing yards, and a lower QB rating.

The team as a whole is better than last year. The line is stronger, the team (overall) is healthier, the weapons are slightly better. The QB play isn't the worst in football. The team winning more games is because the team as a whole is better and has played a fairly easy schedule. 

He's had two offseasons (albeit the first was a bad one), got to sit and watch last year (while also taking snaps) and is in his second year. Like I keep asking where has Hurts shown this big improvement? 

I don't recall using the term "big improvement."

I see a young player that has shown some improvement and still has a long way to go. As I mentioned, I was discouraged after a few weeks of not seeing anything that seemed like improvement. But since then, he has shown flashes that I find encouraging. 

I don't think Hurts is a finished product. I don't think what we see now is all we'll ever get. I think he'll get the opportunity in the NFL to grow and mature as a player and yes, a passer. 

On 12/10/2021 at 12:36 PM, CouchKing said:

More analysis please. Sounds horrible, but give me more data about completion percentage beyond 3 yards. 8yards? 15yards?

And how does Jalen compare to other starting QBs? Can you plot his numbers on the distribution curve for all starting QBs at each completion percentage?

And, can you ask Howie and Sirianni what they think of the data and what it means? 

Well, now we know why you're the king of the couch

The problem with the Hurts haters is that they have a fundamental belief that a running qb can't win consistently in the NFL, so regardless of how well he does or how the team does, they don't want him to be the qb.

So they spend all their time finding arguments against him being the qb, while ignoring the facts that they find inconvenient. If the team wins, it's because everyone else plays well. If they lose, it's because of Hurts.

It's like Republicans and Biden or Democrats and Trump. Facts no longer matter, since their goal isn't to rationally examine the issues, but simply to get the person they don't like out of office, or in the case of Hurts, off the team.

Any rational person looks at the Hurts situation and simply concludes that it could be better, or it could be worse. Of course any rational person would want Justin Herbert to be the qb. But that person would also know that unless we get someone as good as Herbert, Hurts remains the best option.

3 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

The problem with the Hurts haters is that they have a fundamental belief that a running qb can't win consistently in the NFL, so regardless of how well he does or how the team does, they don't want him to be the qb.

So they spend all their time finding arguments against him being the qb, while ignoring the facts that they find inconvenient. If the team wins, it's because everyone else plays well. If they lose, it's because of Hurts.

It's like Republicans and Biden or Democrats and Trump. Facts no longer matter, since their goal isn't to rationally examine the issues, but simply to get the person they don't like out of office, or in the case of Hurts, off the team.

Any rational person looks at the Hurts situation and simply concludes that it could be better, or it could be worse. Of course any rational person would want Justin Herbert to be the qb. But that person would also know that unless we get someone as good as Herbert, Hurts remains the best option.

The facts show he has fallen off consistently across the board the more he starts.

19 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

The problem with the Hurts haters is that they have a fundamental belief that a running qb can't win consistently in the NFL, so regardless of how well he does or how the team does, they don't want him to be the qb.

So they spend all their time finding arguments against him being the qb, while ignoring the facts that they find inconvenient. If the team wins, it's because everyone else plays well. If they lose, it's because of Hurts.

It's like Republicans and Biden or Democrats and Trump. Facts no longer matter, since their goal isn't to rationally examine the issues, but simply to get the person they don't like out of office, or in the case of Hurts, off the team.

Any rational person looks at the Hurts situation and simply concludes that it could be better, or it could be worse. Of course any rational person would want Justin Herbert to be the qb. But that person would also know that unless we get someone as good as Herbert, Hurts remains the best option.

Of course and the same could be said for pretty much anyone not named Brady. As for the Herbert comment that's the point, we want someone better than Hurts. Also Hurts will continue to get injured because they only thing he does well is r-u-n.

2 minutes ago, greend said:

Of course and the same could be said for pretty much anyone not named Brady. As for the Herbert comment that's the point, we want someone better than Hurts. Also Hurts will continue to get injured because they only thing he does well is r-u-n.

But here's where you lose all sense of reality. You want someone better than Hurts, but you think Hurts is really bad, so in your world, anyone would be an upgrade. But you have to ask yourself, is that really the case?

For example, do you think Mac Jones be an upgrade over Hurts? And if so, why?

27 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

But here's where you lose all sense of reality. You want someone better than Hurts, but you think Hurts is really bad, so in your world, anyone would be an upgrade. But you have to ask yourself, is that really the case?

For example, do you think Mac Jones be an upgrade over Hurts? And if so, why?

Where did I say anyone is better than Hurts? I'll bet you an avatar change that in 2 years from the end of this season Hurts is a back-up or out  of the league and Mac Jones is till starting. 

1 minute ago, greend said:

Where did I say anyone is better than Hurts? I'll bet you an avatar change that in 2 years from the end of this season Hurts is a back-up or out  of the league and Mac Jones is till starting. 

Why would I make that bet? I have no illusions that Hurts is a franchise qb. I am not delusional.

You are the one who is delusional about him. I am rational.

Mac Jones is a perfectly fine qb. And he is likely to be a starter for 10 years in the NFL.

But there is a lot of evidence that, if he were on the Eagles right now, our offense would be worse.

That's an undeniable fact. 

 

6 hours ago, E-A-G-L-E-S Eagles said:

Does this mean that he is no longer a "rookie" and we can move on from that excuse?

No

54 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Why would I make that bet? I have no illusions that Hurts is a franchise qb. I am not delusional.

You are the one who is delusional about him. I am rational.

Mac Jones is a perfectly fine qb. And he is likely to be a starter for 10 years in the NFL.

But there is a lot of evidence that, if he were on the Eagles right now, our offense would be worse.

That's an undeniable fact. 

 

You talk in circles.

 

 

 

Good day to you

29 minutes ago, greend said:

You talk in circles.

 

 

 

Good day to you

Yes he does and it makes be dizzy reading it 

Can't we just agree Hurts isn't going to be the long term answer, neither is Minshew, and just move on. The only real questions are when do we bring in a new starter and who that will be.

2 hours ago, Thing3 said:

Can't we just agree Hurts isn't going to be the long term answer, neither is Minshew, and just move on. The only real questions are when do we bring in a new starter and who that will be.

When the humpers finally admit Hurts sucks. Then we can move on

8 hours ago, brkmsn said:

As for his stat lines being "a problem," I will counter with "not if we are winning."

The "winning" also coincides with two other aspects: us playing weak opponents and the offence being reshaped to focus less on Hurts. And we still had a total clunker in the Giants game which is still post those two fundamental changes.

I can't say I have seen noticeable improvements in him as a passer to date. But I still want Hurts to finish out the season because I am still unsure in what we have there. What I can see is that there is something there in him as a runner that gives him a bit of upside if he could ever even get to just being component as a passer.  

9 hours ago, brkmsn said:

As for his stat lines being "a problem," I will counter with "not if we are winning."

Are we?  

9 hours ago, brkmsn said:

I was a little concerned the weeks following the Atlanta game because there didn't seem to be any noticeable improvement. He was making certain situational awareness mistakes over and over that had me concerned. Then he finally showed glimpses of improved play. There was a stretch where his accuracy was much better. The team seemed to embrace his leadership and overall, the team's direction seemed better. 

I'll throw this out once again, you speak of games where he showed glimpses of improved play and games where his accuracy was much better.

My question is, does those games coincide with Sirianni having a better game plan an play calling, I mean it matters.

Take for instance Treavor Lawrence, he was labeled as arguably the best QB ever to enter the draft and he's he's looked horrible.  Is that on him or is that on Urban Myer, I'm thinking it's Myer, ditto for Hurts, I'm thinking Sirianni has to take some of the blame, I just don't see a well thought out offense games plans, rookie QBs need direction, all too often HCs expect rookie QBs to save their jobs based on their athletic abilities.  

4 hours ago, Thing3 said:

Can't we just agree Hurts isn't going to be the long term answer, neither is Minshew, and just move on. The only real questions are when do we bring in a new starter and who that will be.

There are lot of people that believe Hurts is the future

22 minutes ago, EagleVA said:

I'll throw this out once again, you speak of games where he showed glimpses of improved play and games where his accuracy was much better.

My question is, does those games coincide with Sirianni having a better game plan an play calling, I mean it matters.

Take for instance Treavor Lawrence, he was labeled as arguably the best QB ever to enter the draft and he's he's looked horrible.  Is that on him or is that on Urban Myer, I'm thinking it's Myer, ditto for Hurts, I'm thinking Sirianni has to take some of the blame, I just don't see a well thought out offense games plans, rookie QBs need direction, all too often HCs expect rookie QBs to save their jobs based on their athletic abilities.  

It's ironic you mention Lawrence, as JT O'Sullivan had a good video on him that dropped today.

Urban Planning Gone Wrong - YouTube

It details a number of plays where Lawrence makes terrible decisions and misses wide open guys. So while I think Urban isn't doing him any favors, it is clear that his struggles are not only on the coaching staff, or poor play around him.

Of particular interest are two deep balls that are poorly thrown, and are eerily reminiscent of the INT that Hurts threw against the Giants.

28 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

It details a number of plays where Lawrence makes terrible decisions and misses wide open guys. So while I think Urban isn't doing him any favors, it is clear that his struggles are not only on the coaching staff, or poor play around him.

Of particular interest are two deep balls that are poorly thrown, and are eerily reminiscent of the INT that Hurts threw against the Giants.

Unlike Hurts, we saw that Lawrence was a very accurate passer in college, so poorly thrown passes are not what he's about.

Being a good QB is about rhythm, if a QB is not in rhythm you can expect poorly thrown passes. 

So the million dollar question becomes how do you get a QB in rhythm?

The answer is muti-faceted, for young QBs, facet #1, don't ask too much of them, do you see the Pats asking Mac Jones to carry the team?  No you don't, he's supported by a running game and high percentage passes going to specific primary targets, you don't see him searching for open receivers, he drops back and the ball is out heading towards his primary target, just as was the case with Brady.  

With Hurts, he drops back and he's looking for open receivers, either the primary target is not open due to a poorly called play or there was no primary target to begin with or Hurts isn't being patient enough to let the play develop as designed.   

When good high percentage plays are called consistently your QB will get into a rhythm because he's familiar with the plays and he knows exactly how much time the play takes and he knows where to go if his primary target isn't open.

There's too much Helter-Skelter action when the Eagles call pass plays, that's on either Hurts or Sirianni and it looks like it's a 50/50 deal to me, poorly called plays and Hurts is too quick to run right.

1 hour ago, EagleVA said:

I'll throw this out once again, you speak of games where he showed glimpses of improved play and games where his accuracy was much better.

My question is, does those games coincide with Sirianni having a better game plan an play calling, I mean it matters.

To answer your question, I thought we had a good game plan against the Giants. It came down to executing the plays. Hurts clearly had a bad game and that hurt us. He didn't have a bad game because of Sirianni. The games where Hurts' passes were mostly on the mark were because he played well. The game plan was fine in those games as well. Hurts' #1 issue as a passer so far has been his accuracy inconsistency. When he's off, it can be ugly. If he had a couple Cris Carters to throw passes to, it would bail this offense out at times, but as of right now, we haven't had any receivers consistently coming up with off target throws. 

Keep in mind that this will always be a team sport. If a QB is struggling, a receiver making a couple tough grabs at critical times can go a long way in making the QB feel more comfortable, more confident.