2 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

Maybe I just disagree. I'm as tired of "hearing about" Brady as everybody else, but I don't find his approach to be selfish. He's competitive like all the greats and it drives him to put in the work to get to the top and remain there. He never tanked his team because he craved attention. If by "obnoxious" we really mean "always successful and we're tired of it," then yeah.

Always an option.  

1 hour ago, EazyEaglez said:

Kurt Cousins has put up monster numbers for years and he’s never won jack. Numbers are a joke. Do you want to know what numbers really matter when it came to Carson Wentz? It wasn’t his meaningless 4000 yards he put up that one year and quickly got bounced out the playoffs. No it was in 2017 in his making numbers on third down conversions and red zone scoring. That’s winning football. 

I'm not trying to make fun of you, but brother third down conversion rate is a stat....red zone scoring percentage is a stat....stats are usually a reflection in good play. Wentz played out of his mind in 17 and the numbers reflect it. Wentz without the 4k doesn't make the playoffs that year, and another fun stat....no wideout had 600 yards that year aka he did a lot of that off his talent.. I really think that was the year that broke him. You need to realize things you are actually looking for lead for the stats the rest of the world judges...

This podcast had an interesting Jalen Hurts discussion in it.

(16) Guest Mock Draft Series: Texans, Ravens, Eagles & Saints | NFL Stock Exchange | PFF - YouTube

The Eagles discussion starts roughly 46 minutes in.

It features Ben Solak, who isn't my cup of tea, but he made a lot of the same points that so-called Hurts Huggers have made continuously, which is that Hurts has gotten progressively better through his college and pro career, and that while you hear a lot about players who have a good work ethic, it actually rings true with Hurts because it is easy to see how much better he has gotten.

I know some people on here have claimed Hurts hasn't gotten any better, but it's hard to reconcile that view when the vast majority of experts are on the opposite side of the argument.

He also made the point that using Hurts as a bridge qb until the end of his rookie contract doesn't present problems since the locker room loves him, so there's no chance players will start grumbling if he's the starter. Like it or not, leadership matters.

Perhaps the most interesting thing he said is that there are two states of NFL teams, one who have a qb and ones who don't. But he said that the Eagles are in their own category, because the Hurts case is unique. And that's not a bad thing, since they can bring in a qb anytime in the next three years, since Hurts gives them a solid option, and if he keeps getting better it only makes their situation better.   

1 hour ago, brkmsn said:

Maybe I just disagree. I'm as tired of "hearing about" Brady as everybody else, but I don't find his approach to be selfish. He's competitive like all the greats and it drives him to put in the work to get to the top and remain there. He never tanked his team because he craved attention. If by "obnoxious" we really mean "always successful and we're tired of it," then yeah.

The point is that Brady will not be helping a QB in his conference in his last shot at a SB.

11 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

This podcast had an interesting Jalen Hurts discussion in it.

(16) Guest Mock Draft Series: Texans, Ravens, Eagles & Saints | NFL Stock Exchange | PFF - YouTube

The Eagles discussion starts roughly 46 minutes in.

It features Ben Solak, who isn't my cup of tea, but he made a lot of the same points that so-called Hurts Huggers have made continuously, which is that Hurts has gotten progressively better through his college and pro career, and that while you hear a lot about players who have a good work ethic, it actually rings true with Hurts because it is easy to see how much better he has gotten.

I know some people on here have claimed Hurts hasn't gotten any better, but it's hard to reconcile that view when the vast majority of experts are on the opposite side of the argument.

He also made the point that using Hurts as a bridge qb until the end of his rookie contract doesn't present problems since the locker room loves him, so there's no chance players will start grumbling if he's the starter. Like it or not, leadership matters.

Perhaps the most interesting thing he said is that there are two states of NFL teams, one who have a qb and ones who don't. But he said that the Eagles are in their own category, because the Hurts case is unique. And that's not a bad thing, since they can bring in a qb anytime in the next three years, since Hurts gives them a solid option, and if he keeps getting better it only makes their situation better.   

Hurts is unique in how terrible of a passer he is despite so many people being satisfied with that.

And I find it more alarming that Hurts, as is right now, is apparently so progressively improved from where he started his college and pro-career.  It's chilling to think of how bad he must have been...and that was good enough for our scouts to draft him in round 2.

Here is the core of what I just fail to comprehend from Hurts' supporters:

We have a very bad passer at QB...someone who has improved from a very, very bad passer.  His ceiling is likely that of a better, but still below average passer.  By the time he reaches that ceiling, his compensatory running ability will likely have tailed off.

So my question...what the hell are we arguing about here?  Is this seriously how low you want to set the bar for the most important position in sports for the franchise that we all rabidly support?

1 hour ago, jsb235 said:

He also made the point that using Hurts as a bridge qb until the end of his rookie contract doesn't present problems since the locker room loves him, so there's no chance players will start grumbling if he's the starter. Like it or not, leadership matters.

Leadership only matters if winning comes with it.

The only reason the Eagles won down the stretch is they limited Hurts as a passer, and beat the bottom feeders of the NFL.  The one game he had to try and pass them back into it was against the lowly Giants, and he could not do it.

1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

Here is the core of what I just fail to comprehend from Hurts' supporters:

We have a very bad passer at QB...someone who has improved from a very, very bad passer.  His ceiling is likely that of a better, but still below average passer.  By the time he reaches that ceiling, his compensatory running ability will likely have tailed off.

So my question...what the hell are we arguing about here?  Is this seriously how low you want to set the bar for the most important position in sports for the franchise that we all rabidly support?

Here's how I would counter this argument.

A top 5 NFL qb generates about 5,000 total yards in a season, 40 TDs and 15 turnovers. Last year Hurts - projected to 17 games - generated 4,400 yards, 30 TDs and 13 turnovers. So the gap between Hurts and the top QBs in the league is 600 yards and 10 TDs.

I know that this post will probably generate tons of "garbage time" and "running qbs can't win anything" replies, which is fine. People can spew that nonsense all they want. At the end of the day, if Hurts can generate 600 more yards and 10 TDs next year, he's the guy. If he can't, he isn't.

 

1 minute ago, jsb235 said:

Here's how I would counter this argument.

A top 5 NFL qb generates about 5,000 total yards in a season, 40 TDs and 15 turnovers. Last year Hurts - projected to 17 games - generated 4,400 yards, 30 TDs and 13 turnovers. So the gap between Hurts and the top QBs in the league is 600 yards and 10 TDs.

I know that this post will probably generate tons of "garbage time" and "running qbs can't win anything" replies, which is fine. People can spew that nonsense all they want. At the end of the day, if Hurts can generate 600 more yards and 10 TDs next year, he's the guy. If he can't, he isn't.

None of the yards and touchdowns from the regular season matter when the playoffs come.  Tell me, what should a 'top QB' generate in the playoffs.  

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

None of the yards and touchdowns from the regular season matter when the playoffs come.  Tell me, what should a 'top QB' generate in the playoffs.  

Wins.

Doesn't matter how it comes.

4 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Here's how I would counter this argument.

A top 5 NFL qb generates about 5,000 total yards in a season, 40 TDs and 15 turnovers. Last year Hurts - projected to 17 games - generated 4,400 yards, 30 TDs and 13 turnovers. So the gap between Hurts and the top QBs in the league is 600 yards and 10 TDs.

I know that this post will probably generate tons of "garbage time" and "running qbs can't win anything" replies, which is fine. People can spew that nonsense all they want. At the end of the day, if Hurts can generate 600 more yards and 10 TDs next year, he's the guy. If he can't, he isn't.

 

That's a big gap, especially considering the rushing yards and TDs from last year may not be sustainable.

4 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

Wins.

Doesn't matter how it comes.

Exactly... and guess what winning QBs in the playoffs don't do...

Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

Exactly... and guess what winning QBs in the playoffs don't do...

Lose?

Its spin to say that people are saying that he has NEVER improved.  The reality is that most recognize that his improvement has been incremental and the gap to close to "good" is still very wide.  Surely, he has worked his ass off to get where he is, but that doesn't mean that it has been a huge success by NFL standards.

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

That's a big gap, especially considering the rushing yards and TDs from last year may not be sustainable.

It's a big gap. And if he can't do it, he isn't the guy.

But if he does, the additional 60 points from his 10 extra TDs puts us in the top 5. The extra 600 yards puts us in the top 5.

That's the gap between us and the top offenses in the league.

1 minute ago, pallidrone said:

Lose?

Very good.  

Just now, E-A-G-L-E-S Eagles said:

Its spin to say that people are saying that he has NEVER improved.  The reality is that most recognize that his improvement has been incremental and the gap to close to "good" is still very wide.  Surely, he has worked his ass off to get where he is, but that doesn't mean that it has been a huge success by NFL standards.

Of course not and nobody should be arguing that. To go from a one-read running QB in college to a patient pocket QB in the NFL takes some time. Most QBs do not make a huge jump until year 4. Yeah, they sometimes get there a bit early, but historically QBs make their biggest jump in production in year 4. The key to Hurts is how far has he come in year 3 with a complete year behind him, and the same gameplan, teammates, etc in year 3.

3 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

It's a big gap. And if he can't do it, he isn't the guy.

But if he does, the additional 60 points from his 10 extra TDs puts us in the top 5. The extra 600 yards puts us in the top 5.

That's the gap between us and the top offenses in the league.

I will buy that total offensive TDs matters more than passing TDs.  When you are at the 3 yard line, there are a lot of different "right calls" to make.  A QB (or RB) running it in isn't necessarily reason to punish the QB for not tossing a TD.  I agree that all TDs are created equally.  So offensive points scored matters most.

I'm not quite there yet on yards between the 20's.  I think passing yards are more consistent and more sustainable, both game to game and year to year.

3 hours ago, eagle45 said:

So when he actually goes 62.5/3500/18TD/12INT plus the rushing stats of a big back (which is all an improvement), will you agree his time is over?

 

Why would continued improvement mean his time is over? 

1 minute ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Why would continued improvement mean his time is over? 

@eagle45 you can quote or steal this.

Hurts was worse the second half of the season, he did not improve as the season went on, he got worse.

10 hours ago, Shalodeep said:

So 8 more total tds, a huge jump in completion percentage and almost the same amount of rushing with way more passing yards? Literally expect him just to be that much better everywhere?  This would literally be top 3 all time dual threat seasons.

 

It's a jump in completion percentage but he already made a much larger jump from his rookie year to year 2. 

 

And yes I do expect those leaps.  Natural progression as a player plus playing in 2 more games. 

1 minute ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Why would continued improvement mean his time is over? 

See this is, no offense, the hideous pro-Hurts argument.  Marginal improvement still falling within the range of being a terrible passer is not reason to stick with him.

Just now, eagle45 said:

See this is, no offense, the hideous pro-Hurts argument.  Marginal improvement still falling within the range of being a terrible passer is not reason to stick with him.

 

He's not 28 years old.  He's 23 still a very young player.  If he keeps improving and winning then you stick with him.  You only move on if he gets worse or stops improving. 

15 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

It's a jump in completion percentage but he already made a much larger jump from his rookie year to year 2. 

 

And yes I do expect those leaps.  Natural progression as a player plus playing in 2 more games. 

I love how this dude credits Hurts for going from one of the worst completion percentages in the league to middle of the road.

He should have started with plus 60%, he should not get credit for getting there.

13 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

He's not 28 years old.  He's 23 still a very young player.  If he keeps improving and winning then you stick with him.  You only move on if he gets worse or stops improving. 

So every player under 28 who has a season better than the one prior is automatically disqualified from being replaced?  Your exact criteria apply to Tim Tebow.  He improved, won more than Hurts ever did, and got replaced.