2 minutes ago, TEW said:

 

It's not clear at all. Was it said literally or with hyperbole? You take it literally. I take it as hyperbole.

The actual authors of the article seem to think it wasn't nearly as confrontational or dramatic as that quote or their article made it seem when they speak about the situation live and at length.

I didn’t take it as confrontational or dramatic. I’ve said several times though that constant questioning would wear thin, especially over nonsense like "why did you run so much” when the answer is obvious. 

Whatever analytics told the Eagles to draft Reagor, Hurts, and Taylor last year should be thrown directly into the trash. 😂 

That would be like the Eagles taking Rondale Moore, Kyle Trask, and some developmental LB in the 3rd this year (if we were picking 10-15 spots back of course). 

Seriously, Sheil put it really well in the interview he did on the podcast. It's a failure by Howie Roseman/Jeffrey Lurie to not help bridge the gap between analytics and the coaches/scouts. Embarrassingly bad leadership.

I don’t intend to defend Lurie, but I don’t care if someone is a football guy.  
 

I played football in HS and sat football as a walk on in college.  I know more about football from jawing with you jackasses than I ever did from playing it.  Sometimes there is an ignorance that comes from primarily experiencing the game at the ground level.

Usually a non football guy GM will have a little more ingenuity than someone who had a 10 year NFL career....not to mention a lack of CTE, which figures to help with the draft board.  
 

 

Stacking all these things up and it doesn’t paint a great picture of Lurie...

* Wanted to fire Reich after one year in which Agholor, DGB and other bums played wide receiver with a rookie QB. Wentz reportedly saved his job. 

* Had Schwartz lined up to replace Pederson if he got off to a slow start. 

* We won the Super Bowl a few months later. His crowning achievement nearly never happened because of his meddling. 

* His constant poking and prodding and meddling led to Pederson being cool with getting fired. 

* Served as a tie breaker of sorts in drafting JJAW, who was ranked below Parris Campbell.

* Helped opening up the quarterback factory en route to alienating our franchise QB.  

8 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I don’t intend to defend Lurie, but I don’t care if someone is a football guy.  
 

I played football in HS and sat football as a walk on in college.  I know more about football from jawing with you jackasses than I ever did from playing it.  Sometimes there is an ignorance that comes from primarily experiencing the game at the ground level.

Usually a non football guy GM will have a little more ingenuity than someone who had a 10 year NFL career....not to mention a lack of CTE, which figures to help with the draft board.  
 

 

You had some really bad coaches.

13 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

Whatever analytics told the Eagles to draft Reagor, Hurts, and Taylor last year should be thrown directly into the trash. 😂 

That would be like the Eagles taking Rondale Moore, Kyle Trask, and some developmental LB in the 3rd this year (if we were picking 10-15 spots back of course). 

Seriously, Sheil put it really well in the interview he did on the podcast. It's a failure by Howie Roseman/Jeffrey Lurie to not help bridge the gap between analytics and the coaches/scouts. Embarrassing leadership.

Rondale Moore, Jamie Newman and Sage Surratt. FYP

26 minutes ago, TEW said:

Is that a quote from the article?  

I mean the headline should be Doug wasn’t expecting an analytics inquisition. 

I don’t get anyone even remotely trying to defend Lurie here. For the standards that he and his employees ostensibly set for themselves, he has become an abject failure.

Really ever since his divorce. It’s time that he considers moving on to something else.

EDIT: I know people have a tendency to justify decisions their "group” makes but Lurie somehow fired a coach that is likely to become the second or third best coach in NFL history. That’s on him.

It’s really starting to feel like Doug said F it and when asked about his plan for the future he trolled Lurie with "Press Taylor OC, Matt Burke DC, and run it all back”.

I’ve reported directly to a few CEO, Presidents, and VPs.  Through my experience I can say "people skills” are not at the top of their talents.

Some of you guys getting so upset about regular status meetings and how someone might have been talked to are wandering down a rabbit hole.  That’s how corporate dynamics work in many places.  A football team isn’t necessarily any different by definition.

Doug didn’t have to like it and he didn’t have to work there.  Lurie was correct in micromanaging him; he demonstrated clearly after Frank and John left that he was in over his head.  

The assumption that Lurie, after 27 years of owning a NFL team, talking to scouts and coaches, watching film, is still totally ignorant is a stretch. Doesn't mean he's capable of running a NFL team, but it's doubtful he's so ignorant he can't ask meaningful questions or understand the answers.

It sounds more and more like Doug was insecure for good reason, he only had 3 years as an OC under Reid, he leaned on Reich. And Schwartz was almost a co-HC.

Winning the SB may have worsened things, Doug might have felt he was above questioning when all he really had one good season as a HC, a really good one, but not one that would convince a GM/Owner that he was beyond scrutiny, especially when they weren't sure how much credit went to Doug v Reich. Wentz and the offense regressed after 2017, while injuries were certainly a factor for both, it's not surprising that Lowie might have lost confidence in Doug, especially given his lackluster search for assistant coaches (look who Siri found in a few weeks).

The "tell" on Doug was that he actually thought the Eagles could compete in 2021, that's a "player's attitude," players always are overly optimistic, they couldn't come back from injury or an offseason and do all that work if they didn't believe it would pay off. It suggests that Doug' s optimism was the driving force behind the signings and acquisitions. I forgot that Doug was QB coach in 2011-12 under Reid, when Jackson was having big seasons as the QB's best friend. The received wisdom is that Howie signed DeSean out of guilt, but I wonder if Doug pushed for him, remembering DeSean as a deep threat.

 

 

Having to defend in-game decisions, from the owner no less, week in and week out even after a win is ridiculous and I can't believe there are people who think otherwise. We mock Jerry Jones for being intrusive and our owner does it and all of a sudden it's ok to do. This organization becomes more of a circus every year.

1 hour ago, TEW said:

 

It's not clear at all. Was it said literally or with hyperbole? You take it literally. I take it as hyperbole.

The actual authors of the article seem to think it wasn't nearly as confrontational or dramatic as that quote or their article made it seem when they speak about the situation live and at length.

It was clearly hyperbole. And at the root of that is an owner who clearly questioned every move the coach made even after wins, and after losses it would seem it was even worse.

Obviously lurie wouldn't think Doug was the worst coach in history at any point during his time here. It's bad enough on it's own lurie was even doing those meetings in the first place, really didn't need the hyperbole. But it can't be dismissed because someone exaggerated, it still happened.

19 minutes ago, devpool said:

Having to defend in-game decisions, from the owner no less, week in and week out even after a win is ridiculous and I can't believe there are people who think otherwise. We mock Jerry Jones for being intrusive and our owner does it and all of a sudden it's ok to do. This organization becomes more of a circus every year.

It's now intrusive to review decision making? I mean, come on, who is the coach supposed to defend his decisions to if not the owner? Or do you believe the HC should never answer to anybody?

This idea that Pederson, or any head coach for that matter, should be beyond reproach is crazy to me. Reviewing a game and play calling is a circus? Or intrusive? This is SOP for most senior management in a large organization. Even the authors of the article admit this is common within the NFL.

20 minutes ago, TEW said:

It's now intrusive to review decision making? I mean, come on, who is the coach supposed to defend his decisions to if not the owner? Or do you believe the HC should never answer to anybody?

This idea that Pederson, or any head coach for that matter, should be beyond reproach is crazy to me. Reviewing a game and play calling is a circus? Or intrusive? This is SOP for most senior management in a large organization. Even the authors of the article admit this is common within the NFL.

You think every single 4th down decision or 3rd down playcall in every game needs to be reviewed by the owner? Dude that's insane. If he makes an egregious bad call that causes a loss, sure. But after every game having to defend your decisions is absolute lunacy.  

Yes, the OWNER doing those things is intrusive. You don't hear about hardly any owners getting that involved except Jerry Jones because other owners hire people who know what they're doing to handle it (GM, Football operations, other coaches). They don't micromanage the ish out of their head coach. Not one person is saying he is beyond reproach, but you have an owner who was questioning why they ran the ball in a game where the winds were 20+ mph. 

An NFL team is not an average large organization, and even in those organizations you think people like being micromanaged? You're gonna sit here and tell me you would love your boss questioning everything you did every time you did it? Come on dude. 

1 minute ago, devpool said:

You think every single 4th down decision or 3rd down playcall in every game needs to be reviewed by the owner? Dude that's insane. If he makes an egregious bad call that causes a loss, sure. But after every game having to defend your decisions is absolute lunacy.  

Yes, the OWNER doing those things is intrusive. You don't hear about hardly any owners getting that involved except Jerry Jones because other owners hire people who know what they're doing to handle it (GM, Football operations, other coaches). They don't micromanage the ish out of their head coach. Not one person is saying he is beyond reproach, but you have an owner who was questioning why they ran the ball in a game where the winds were 20+ mph. 

An NFL team is not an average large organization, and even in those organizations you think people like being micromanaged? You're gonna sit here and tell me you would love your boss questioning everything you did every time you did it? Come on dude. 

It needs to be reviewed, for sure, and I don't see why it would be "insane" for the owner to be involved. He's the owner after all. As far as one bad call goes, that's not how things work. It's far more likely that a series of mistakes causes a loss than one bad call. That's the entire point. Analytics will often show you that the cumulative effect of a series of mistakes were more impactful in the loss than one bad call.

Again, the writers of this article said on air that it's common in the NFL for owners to do this. It's not just Lurie. It's a widespread thing. Now, perhaps the Eagles place more emphasis on analytics or are more detailed oriented, but it's not like this is process unique to the Eagles.

"Liking it" is irrelevant. It's a job, regardless of if you're a NFL coach, a CEO or a military commander. You make decisions and those decisions are reviewed.

4 hours ago, Mike030270 said:

Why would Bengals not choose Sewell?

Burrow wants chase. However i also think they might believe there’s going to be some nice quality OT early in the second that they could get 

3 hours ago, TEW said:

It needs to be reviewed, for sure, and I don't see why it would be "insane" for the owner to be involved. He's the owner after all. As far as one bad call goes, that's not how things work. It's far more likely that a series of mistakes causes a loss than one bad call. That's the entire point. Analytics will often show you that the cumulative effect of a series of mistakes were more impactful in the loss than one bad call.

Again, the writers of this article said on air that it's common in the NFL for owners to do this. It's not just Lurie. It's a widespread thing. Now, perhaps the Eagles place more emphasis on analytics or are more detailed oriented, but it's not like this is process unique to the Eagles.

"Liking it" is irrelevant. It's a job, regardless of if you're a NFL coach, a CEO or a military commander. You make decisions and those decisions are reviewed.

I have a feeling people in here don't know that.  And will ignore that part of your post and keep arguing. 

5 hours ago, Alphagrand said:

I’ve reported directly to a few CEO, Presidents, and VPs.  Through my experience I can say "people skills” are not at the top of their talents.

Some of you guys getting so upset about regular status meetings and how someone might have been talked to are wandering down a rabbit hole.  That’s how corporate dynamics work in many places.  A football team isn’t necessarily any different by definition.

Doug didn’t have to like it and he didn’t have to work there.  Lurie was correct in micromanaging him; he demonstrated clearly after Frank and John left that he was in over his head.  

This begs the most obvious question. If you feel he needs micromanaged in the first place, and can’t be trusted with decisions most head coaches get, why is he your head coach?

25 minutes ago, EagleJoe8 said:

This begs the most obvious question. If you feel he needs micromanaged in the first place, and can’t be trusted with decisions most head coaches get, why is he your head coach?

That is the part of the story that feels fabricated 

18 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

That is the part of the story that feels fabricated 

It could be, but it’s also fair to ask, why would Doug be ok with being fired if that were the case?

17 minutes ago, EagleJoe8 said:

It could be, but it’s also fair to ask, why would Doug be ok with being fired if that were the case?

Good question unfortunately I don't think we will ever get the real answers. I wish Doug would spill some info lol

All of this is why Siri could be done before he even starts , Just a yes man to Jeff and Howie . He doesn’t appear to have that dominate personality to keep them in line . Just happy to get opportunity to be a HC .

14 hours ago, NCiggles said:

 

Fine

I am unsure if Groh was wrong or not.  I mean the offense got worse in 2020 not better.  I do think Doug was too loyal to his coaches and didn't want to make a change.  I think your statement kind of begs the question as to why Lurie believed he was right that Groh needed to be fired.  I mean why would the owner believe he was is in a better position to determine the need for the change vs. the coach.  I could understand if what we heard was Howie believed a change needed to be made and I went with Howie's judgment but that's different than the owner coming to a decision that the offensive coordinator should be fired.  

That's a reasonable thought. I don't know the whole truth, for damn sure.

11 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

Good question unfortunately I don't think we will ever get the real answers. I wish Doug would spill some info lol

Me too. 

NFL Update

 

@MySportsUpdate

Players want it virtual again. Bruce Arians said this on 2/18: "If we lose spring, young players are not getting developed. Vets love that crap b/c it means they don’t get to take their jobs. Young kids need practice. Vets don't have to come if they don't want to, it’s voluntary”
 

ProFootballTalk

 

@ProFootballTalk

·

Apr 13, 2021

Unless players plan to do nothing at all this offseason, they'll be working out somewhere. Is the local Planet Fitness and/or high-school practice field safer than the team's practice facility?