1 minute ago, Swoop said:

Now now, don't assume things.

Kind of like you assume things about Hurts?

Just now, jsb235 said:

Kind of like you assume things about Hurts?

Factually, his passing is terrible. The numbers show it. 

Chin up buddy you'll leave the basement someday.

1 minute ago, Swoop said:

Factually, his passing is terrible. The numbers show it. 

Chin up buddy you'll leave the basement someday.

You assume he will never improve.

You assume the team can't win with him at qb.

You assume that drafting someone will make the team better.

For a guy who is critical of people assuming things, you assume a lot of things.

Just now, jsb235 said:

You assume he will never improve.

You assume the team can't win with him at qb.

You assume that drafting someone will make the team better.

For a guy who is critical of people assuming things, you assume a lot of things.

Don't believe I ever said he would never improve. I have repeatedly said to this point he hasn't. To anyone watching or looking at it from a numbers standpoint, he's gotten worse across the board, as I've pointed out.

The team hasn't been winning with him. The few they have won against have been (mostly) bottom feeding teams. Do I think they'll win a SB with him? No. Historically, this is accurate.

And no, I never said that the person we draft will unquestionably make the team better. I realize that it could be an even exchange or worse, but I would also make an attempt at getting better at the position.

 

9 minutes ago, Swoop said:

Don't believe I ever said he would never improve. I have repeatedly said to this point he hasn't. To anyone watching or looking at it from a numbers standpoint, he's gotten worse across the board, as I've pointed out.

The team hasn't been winning with him. The few they have won against have been (mostly) bottom feeding teams. Do I think they'll win a SB with him? No. Historically, this is accurate.

And no, I never said that the person we draft will unquestionably make the team better. I realize that it could be an even exchange or worse, but I would also make an attempt at getting better at the position.

 

They have already won more games this year than last year.

The offense has gone from among the worst in the league to the upper half.

Historically, Hurts has a decent chance at sustained success.

Everything that you think should happen has already happened, and you still want him replaced. 

2 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

They have already won more games this year than last year.

The offense has gone from among the worst in the league to the upper half.

Historically, Hurts has a decent chance at sustained success.

Everything that you think should happen has already happened, and you still want him replaced. 

Points 1 and 2 are because of the running game. Obviously Hurts is a component of the running game, but with or without him, it's still great. That would be like saying the Titans win because of Tannehill when the offense clearly runs through Henry. Remember, they're telling Hurts to throw less. That's not a good thing.

Not sure where you get the idea that based on history Hurts himself will have sustained success when history shows the opposite being true.

 

Love Cunningham arguments.... The guy flat out said he didn't listen to anyone and didn't take to coaching till no one wanted him and had to retire to finally get it. Yet people keep saying it was everyone else that was the problem. So Cunningham is lying about his own career? 

Saw Vicks name brought up too and he also admitted he didn't listen to coaches or give a sheet. 

So all we have to do is wait till hurts is in his 30's and can't run as much before he can be a better passer.. sounds awesome can't wait till 2030

1 minute ago, Swoop said:

Points 1 and 2 are because of the running game. So now it's not whether you win, but how you win?

Obviously Hurts is a component of the running game, but with or without him, it's still great. Against the Jets. Not exactly the best evidence to back up your case.

That would be like saying the Titans win because of Tannehill when the offense clearly runs through Henry. Remember, they're telling Hurts to throw less. That's not a good thing. Are you making my argument? If Hurts is key to the running game, and that's what we do best, we shouldn't change him? Is that really what you are arguing?

Not sure where you get the idea that based on history Hurts himself will have sustained success when history shows the opposite being true. This doesn't seem remotely connected to the point you were trying to make.

 

 

19 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

Love Cunningham arguments.... The guy flat out said he didn't listen to anyone and didn't take to coaching till no one wanted him and had to retire to finally get it. Yet people keep saying it was everyone else that was the problem. So Cunningham is lying about his own career? 

That's not a very accurate assessment of what Randall ever said. He stated that he was being told contradicting things from Ryan and Kotite and never knew who he was supposed to listen to. He actually responded very well to Scovil's coaching at the position. He became a very good passer. 

11 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

That's not a very accurate assessment of what Randall ever said. He stated that he was being told contradicting things from Ryan and Kotite and never knew who he was supposed to listen to. He actually responded very well to Scovil's coaching at the position. He became a very good passer. 

While with the Eagles, Cunningham was known for his cocky attitude and his flamboyance, which included showing up at his first practice as a rookie in a Porsche, once leaving a preseason game at halftime to attend Whitney Houston’s birthday party, and clashing with coaches at times.

 

"I was no longer playing for the Eagles (because) I got prideful and arrogant and thought that I know more than the coaching staff,” Cunningham said during a recent sermon. "They said, ‘Well, hey, man, we don’t need you anymore.’ But praise God for his mercy to allow us to have a comeback.”

Thanks for proving my point that you guys don't even listen to the man himself saying he fought with coaches. 

9 hours ago, downundermike said:

Yeah, we want him to complete more than 46% of his passes more than 3 yards past the line of scrimmage.  How unrealistic of us.

So are you saying he’s never done this? Never in one game at all? 

2 hours ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

While with the Eagles, Cunningham was known for his cocky attitude and his flamboyance, which included showing up at his first practice as a rookie in a Porsche, once leaving a preseason game at halftime to attend Whitney Houston’s birthday party, and clashing with coaches at times.

 

"I was no longer playing for the Eagles (because) I got prideful and arrogant and thought that I know more than the coaching staff,” Cunningham said during a recent sermon. "They said, ‘Well, hey, man, we don’t need you anymore.’ But praise God for his mercy to allow us to have a comeback.”

Thanks for proving my point that you guys don't even listen to the man himself saying he fought with coaches. 

Feel free to add more context to that quote, but it sounds like he was specifically talking about his time under Rhodes/Gruden, but don't let that stop you from pretending he was talking about himself in the early developmental part of his NFL career. I love watching people twist stuff out of context to try to validate an outrageous claim. Also, his antics (for lack of a better word) were simply an indication of his maturity at the time and had nothing to do with "coachability."

5 hours ago, jsb235 said:

 

Obviously winning is important, but the point is that the team is winning despite the QB limiting the offense with his passing. 

I know it was the Jets, but that's the only game we have to use as of right now. Still pretty impressive to fire off 185 yards with our only backs being someone fresh off of IR and a rookie.

Not sure how you got that from what I'm saying. The offense goes through the running game, not Hurts. Hurts isnt the "key" to the running game, he's just a part of it. As I said, they want the ball out of his hands more as time goes on. Maybe you should sit and think about what that means.

You brought up Hurts and his future success and how history shows he has a good chance at continue to succeed. I was explaining that history shows the opposite.

2 hours ago, Swoop said:

Obviously winning is important, but the point is that the team is winning despite the QB limiting the offense with his passing. 

If he is making the offense work, who cares how it works? And there is ample evidence that Hurts is impacting the run game beyond what he does on his own. His presence on the field makes it much harder for a defense to defend the run.

I know it was the Jets, but that's the only game we have to use as of right now. Still pretty impressive to fire off 185 yards with our only backs being someone fresh off of IR and a rookie.

If you know it was the Jets, why do you keep using that game as any indication of anything. The Dolphins have one of the worst running offenses in the league and generated 100 yards over their season average against the Jets. Obviously the team will still be able to run the ball against the Jets with Minshew. The Saints? Not so much.

Not sure how you got that from what I'm saying. The offense goes through the running game, not Hurts. Hurts isnt the "key" to the running game, he's just a part of it. As I said, they want the ball out of his hands more as time goes on. Maybe you should sit and think about what that means.

I love the "they are getting the ball out of his hands" thesis. He is clearly a component of the running game and is someone that the defense has to worry about on every play. You just assume that the running game will be just as good with anyone behind center. But there is zero basis for that.

You brought up Hurts and his future success and how history shows he has a good chance at continue to succeed. I was explaining that history shows the opposite.

This is wrong. The history I was referring to was the notion that running qbs can't be successful in the NFL, when the reality is much different.

 

15 hours ago, pallidrone said:

Sure what would you like to know.

The meaning of obvious, look it up because you have no idea. You babble on about attacking people personally and you do it in your very own post without 1 bit of proof.

1 hour ago, jsb235 said:

 

I'm not going to continue talking in circles with you. You think Hurts is a stud, I don't.

We'll see where it goes from here.

46 minutes ago, greend said:

The meaning of obvious, look it up because you have no idea. You babble on about attacking people personally and you do it in your very own post without 1 bit of proof.

I am trying to find your point here.

I did babble on about attacking people - I never once said it was wrong or that people should be nice to each other. I said it was what Philly does and that Wentz could not handle that. The proof is in the articles written about him and his attitude last year with the team. That is all the proof I needed. Where there was smoke there is fire, and it proved that the fire burned brightly because they got rid of him even with a $30m cap hit.

4 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

I am trying to find your point here.

I did babble on about attacking people - I never once said it was wrong or that people should be nice to each other. I said it was what Philly does and that Wentz could not handle that. The proof is in the articles written about him and his attitude last year with the team. That is all the proof I needed. Where there was smoke there is fire, and it proved that the fire burned brightly because they got rid of him even with a $30m cap hit.

Nah, you have zero proof that a guy who stays in and throws a franchise record t.d. after a major injury is weak. You along with some others are just haters. That's all I need to know. I love it when people like yourself that couldn't play a down of pro football without getting killed call a guy that you don't know "weak". And that sir is you talking out of your arse, Ace.

Just now, greend said:

Nah, you have zero proof that a guy who stays in and throws a franchise record t.d. after a major injury is weak. You along with some others are just haters. That's all I need to know. I love it when people like yourself that couldn't play a down of pro football without getting killed call a guy that you don't know "weak". And that sir is you talking out of your arse, Ace.

I didn't say weak either. I said fragile ego. I don't have to play football to know what a fragile ego is and based off of reports and then the eventual trade of him, it makes me believe it so.

I maybe talking out of my arse, but considering that we are on a message board talking about a football team that we have no direct access to, we are all talking out of our arse.

53 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Man.....you might be the most dense poster on the board.  Which is saying A LOT.  

You're wasting your time.

5 hours ago, jsb235 said:

If you know it was the Jets, why do you keep using that game as any indication of anything. The Dolphins have one of the worst running offenses in the league and generated 100 yards over their season average against the Jets. Obviously the team will still be able to run the ball against the Jets with Minshew.

Jets give up 141.9 rushing yards per game.  Eagles had 185 rushing yards.  Only two teams had more rushing yards against the Jets this year than the Eagles did, and those teams had Alvin Kamara and Jonathan Taylor.

 

5 hours ago, jsb235 said:

I love the "they are getting the ball out of his hands" thesis. He is clearly a component of the running game and is someone that the defense has to worry about on every play. You just assume that the running game will be just as good with anyone behind center. But there is zero basis for that.

See above

14 hours ago, Devaster said:

Randall wasn't allowed to show his passing prowess under Buddy Ryan. That was a widely known fact. He finally got a chance to show his passing prowess with the Vikings.

You could see when he was with the Eagles that he was an accurate passer with a bazooka for an arm, unfortunately Buddy Ryan, Ritch Kotite, and Ray Rhodes didn't have a clue how to use him.

I will give Buddy Ryan credit for knowing when to let him do his thing, after his defense would get pooped from carrying the offense due to Buddy trying to establish the run with scrubs and losing the lead, midway through the 3rd he'd unleash Randall an more often than not Randall would pull the win.

The guy that disgusted me more that those 3 know-nothing coaches above is freaking Lurie with his "well, we'll see" when asked about retaining Randall, he's such a football ignorant dumb sheet.

Question is, when Hurts is gone will his worshippers follow him? 

22 minutes ago, greend said:

Question is, when Hurts is gone will his worshippers follow him?