3 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

I dont mind. I have the Browns +440

Ya the Steelers deserved that touchdown against them for being a bunch of cowards. 

Everyone is assuming that the meeting tomorrow is about the future of the team regarding Doug or Carson. How do we know Lurie doesn't want to have a talk with Doug about the GM? His drafting history is pathetic, his contracts to aging and oft injured players is troublesome. 

I've said before, Banner was Lurie's right hand guy until he wasn't.

26 minutes ago, TEW said:

You make decisions on the available information. That doesn’t mean you always get it right. Lurie’s not dumb. He cares. He wants to win. If he keeps Howie there’s got to be a reason for it based on his inside information.

Just like the market is rational eh?

 

12 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Sure, but there isn’t anything obvious to base it on over the past three years. Do you see anything?

No, that's kind of my point.

We see the results of thousands of decisions, but not how the decisions were made.

For example, if coaches lobby hard for player X and say they don't want player Y, so you take player X because the coach wants nothing to do with player Y, does that decision fall on the coach or the scouts or the GM?  It's like people think everything happens in a vacuum with the GM making every micro decision on player personnel and the coach having no influence. We don't know how these decisions are being made, and maybe it's 100% on Howie, but if Lurie wants to get rid of Doug and wants to keep Howie, then obviously there is much more to the story than we know.

Another good real life example was Chip vs Howie. Chip demanded full control after he inherited one of the most talented groups of offensive players in the NFL. He said he needed to do things his way and Howie was an impediment to those ends. Within 2 offseasons Jackson, Maclin and McCoy were all gone and we had to go into total rebuild. By all accounts the Eagles have a much more collaborative environment than that, with the HC along with position coaches having a good amount of influence. So it's not as simple as "the drafts haven't been good, fire Howie!" You can't force coaches to play guys they don't want. On the other hand, someone like Stout might lobby hard to get you a gem like Mailata. So it can go both ways.

3 minutes ago, TEW said:

 

No, that's kind of my point.

We see the results of thousands of decisions, but not how the decisions were made.

For example, if coaches lobby hard for player X and say they don't want player Y, so you take player X because the coach wants nothing to do with player Y, does that decision fall on the coach or the scouts or the GM?  It's like people think everything happens in a vacuum with the GM making every micro decision on player personnel and the coach having no influence. We don't know how these decisions are being made, and maybe it's 100% on Howie, but if Lurie wants to get rid of Doug and wants to keep Howie, then obviously there is much more to the story than we know.

Another good real life example was Chip vs Howie. Chip demanded full control after he inherited one of the most talented groups of offensive players in the NFL. He said he needed to do things his way and Howie was an impediment to those ends. Within 2 offseasons Jackson, Maclin and McCoy were all gone and we had to go into total rebuild. By all accounts the Eagles have a much more collaborative environment than that, with the HC along with position coaches having a good amount of influence. So it's not as simple as "the drafts haven't been good, fire Howie!" You can't force coaches to play guys they don't want. On the other hand, someone like Stout might lobby hard to get you a gem like Mailata. So it can go both ways.

It just all sets up so conveniently for Howie. Always. He was doing what the coaches wanted. He deferred to a veteran front office guy on a certain pick. He let Schwartz pick the veteran LB. 

No matter what, the wrong decision was made over and over. That’s on the guy with roster control  

Lurie had an interesting comment about how Howie’s job description is much bigger than picking players. If that’s the case, maybe he needs to focus on those other roles and hire a GM to make those decisions. 

I don’t know who 41 is on the Steelers but he has been Nate Gerry bad tonight. 

2 minutes ago, TEW said:

 

No, that's kind of my point.

We see the results of thousands of decisions, but not how the decisions were made.

For example, if coaches lobby hard for player X and say they don't want player Y, so you take player X because the coach wants nothing to do with player Y, does that decision fall on the coach or the scouts or the GM?  It's like people think everything happens in a vacuum with the GM making every micro decision on player personnel and the coach having no influence. We don't know how these decisions are being made, and maybe it's 100% on Howie, but if Lurie wants to get rid of Doug and wants to keep Howie, then obviously there is much more to the story than we know.

Another good real life example was Chip vs Howie. Chip demanded full control after he inherited one of the most talented groups of offensive players in the NFL. He said he needed to do things his way and Howie was an impediment to those ends. Within 2 offseasons Jackson, Maclin and McCoy were all gone and we had to go into total rebuild. By all accounts the Eagles have a much more collaborative environment than that, with the HC along with position coaches having a good amount of influence. So it's not as simple as "the drafts haven't been good, fire Howie!" You can't force coaches to play guys they don't want. On the other hand, someone like Stout might lobby hard to get you a gem like Mailata. So it can go both ways.

It doesn’t seem collaborative as much as an abdication of responsibility.  I don’t think they’re being irrational or ignorant in their decision process.  However, at this point there’s a problem in the process.  It’s seems the best way to fix it is to move on from Howie in the role he is in currently.  Howie isn’t processing the information to make correct decisions. I mean relying on the coaches input to take Reagor over Jefferson is a good example. Sure you should listen to your coaches in who you pick but also understand evaluations to understand why they may be wrong.  I think the bad decisions are really a product of Howie being too reliant on the judgment of others. When there’s a lack of cohesion between the personnel and scouts Howie appears unable to stitch that gap.  

1 hour ago, Mike030270 said:

Should be a meeting between Lurie and Howie

Pederson reports to Lurie, not Howie. 

6 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

It just all sets up so conveniently for Howie. Always. He was doing what the coaches wanted. He deferred to a veteran front office guy on a certain pick. He let Schwartz pick the veteran LB. 

No matter what, the wrong decision was made over and over. That’s on the guy with roster control  

Lurie had an interesting comment about how Howie’s job description is much bigger than picking players. If that’s the case, maybe he needs to focus on those other roles and hire a GM to make those decisions. 

And this is my point: the Eagles don’t operate as a dictatorship — at least as far as it has been presented to the public. Maybe these are all Howie‘s decisions, or maybe not. We simply don’t know, but by all indication they aren’t.

And you have to admit that having the personnel department conflicting with the coaching staff isn’t a good thing, right? And if Doug or the rest of the coaching staff is the marginal influencer for these decisions, then shouldn’t that factor into the equation?

That’s why I say we need to take Lurie’s decision as more informed than ours. This idea that he has some kind of bias (what’s the bias anyway — no one seems willing to say what it is) is, to me at least, crazy. The guy wants to win. Whatever decision he makes, it’s because he thinks it gives him a better chance to win.

3 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

It doesn’t seem collaborative as much as an abdication of responsibility.  I don’t think they’re being irrational or ignorant in their decision process.  However, at this point there’s a problem in the process.  It’s seems the best way to fix it is to move on from Howie in the role he is in currently.  Howie isn’t processing the information to make correct decisions. I mean relying on the coaches input to take Reagor over Jefferson is a good example. Sure you should listen to your coaches in who you pick but also understand evaluations to understand why they may be wrong.  I think the bad decisions are really a product of Howie being too reliant on the judgment of others. When there’s a lack of cohesion between the personnel and scouts Howie appears unable to stitch that gap.  

Ok, but if you take a player the coach doesn’t want, the coach probably won’t play them... thus making it appear to us fans as if the player flopped. It can be a damned if you do, damned if you don’t type of situation. Only Lurie is going to know that which is why I say we need to take his decision as more informed than ours.

Maybe the Steelers can join the Wentz sweepstakes.  Big Ben is toast.  

16 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I don’t know who 41 is on the Steelers but he has been Nate Gerry bad tonight. 

Edmunds I think.

35 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

I dont mind. I have the Browns +440

You took the Browns straight up on the money line?  

Just now, Wentz_Era said:

Edmunds I think.

I think edmunds is 34. It’s Robert Spillane aka Nate Gerry Jr.  

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

Maybe the Steelers can join the Wentz sweepstakes.  Big Ben is toast.  

I was thinking Hurts. Steelers could use a RB too. Hurts and Sanders for a couple mid round picks... all for it. 

As bad as the NFC East may be, there are at least 2 teams that put up less of a fight in the playoffs than the NFC East’s representative.  

22 minutes ago, downundermike said:

I would've thought with all the success NE has had the last 20 years they would've done this already.

7 minutes ago, 315Eagles said:

You took the Browns straight up on the money line?  

yes, and I had a 100% profit boost to use for any bet on this game. so it decided on Cleveland moneyline which was originally +220 but I got it at +440.

had the Rams over seattle too, in a parlay with tampa bay yesterday. 

2 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

yes, and I had a 100% profit boost to use for any bet on this game. so it decided on Cleveland moneyline which was originally +220 but I got it at +440.

Damn, good call.  I never would've took them to win outright.

What we are watching right now is how the Eagles compiled the vast majority of their offensive production this year.

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

What we are watching right now is how the Eagles compiled the vast majority of their offensive production this year.

Heck the Steelers still outscored the eagles highest total of the year and they were down 28-0 at one point midway through the second quarter 

Happy for Cleveland and Buffalo.  They've been bad for years and their fans deserve this.  They are both passionate fanbases like Philly.

Just now, 315Eagles said:

Damn, good call.  I never would've took them to win outright.

Pittsburgh sucks. I felt it had a good chance of happening. With that reasonable amount of confidence plus the profit boost I felt it was worth the gamble. I only wish I put the max bet on it. But I wasnt that confident. 

Just now, HazletonEagle said:

Pittsburgh sucks. I felt it had a good chance of happening. With that reasonable amount of confidence plus the profit boost I felt it was worth the gamble. I only wish I put the max bet on it. But I wasnt that confident. 

Cleveland is a good team but they barely beat Pittsburgh last week with them resting guys.

I think Pittsburgh took them lightly and then got punched in the mouth early with those turnovers.

Oh boy....Baker about to get another 10 commercials now 😄