2 hours ago, greend said:

A win is a win. You sound just like a micro manager.

I agree... to an extent.  I would be very disappointed (and was) if the team wins because the rookie QB running the ball is a major part of the game plan, because that is all about the short term, and not at all about long term sustainability.

 

I've said it before, and I will continue to say it.  When the QB has more rushes than completions, that's a MASSIVE red flag to any type of long term sustainability.    In that NO game, Hurts had 17 completions and 18 carries.  167 yards passing, 106 yards rushing.   That is NOT sustainable.   And frankly, they would have had no shot if NO didn't have to prove that Taysom Hill was actually a QB.   If they played Winston, I have no doubt, the Eagles lose that game.

7 hours ago, EagleJoe8 said:

I think the reason Smolenski doesn’t get much said about him is he doesn’t seem to have much, if any, direct involvement with roster development. His role seemed to describe being involved with and overseeing things like marketing, team sponsors, public relations, working with team lawyers, stadium issues, ect. Things of that nature. Things the average fan doesn’t care about or think of. 

And my follow on question is, with such a bad culture over a period of time, there should be a stage where a senior Exec steps across the divide, even if it's not his area of expertise, to raise concerns.  Especially one that will have the ear of Lurie.  He can't be blind to the cultural issues in the Eagles, nor the feedback from the customers/partners.

I'd recommend anyone watch (rather than listen to) the Q&A podcast. The body language on Mikell and Avant in regards to that new story was revealing, as was what they did not say or took care to not say anything too controversial. Both have worked inside the Eagles, so it's not rumour or sources

56 minutes ago, austinfan said:

What mess? The rebuild was inevitable, it was delayed a year, but nothing could have stopped it. And 2020 was basically the same as a rebuilding year, they ended up with #6.

Howie already has 3 1sts (fingers crossed) in 2022 draft, 11 picks in this draft and Ertz still on the trading block.

And it's a heck of a lot easier drafting at #12 and #37 than 20+ and 50+.

The real key is whether Sirianni is the right HC for a rebuild, and we'll have a good idea in two years. If he can turn players like JJAW, Jackson, etc. into assets, he's the right guy.

It's a mess if we hit 2023 and we've barely added talent, and have to look forward to a decade like the Giants (6 10+ game losing seasons in 10 years after winning a SB).

I thought we were past all this when the conversation turned to economics and politics.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Lurie/Howie are just names. It boils down to if you owned any team, would you be completely hands off or would you use your power here and there. Not "if you were in this specific situation of being Jeff Lurie".

 My point is everyone spends every day on here saying "I wouldn't have given that contract to that player. I wouldn't have signed this free agent. This is the guy I want to sign. I would draft this guy over that guy" and then when hypothetically given the reigns to do so they are going to take a sharp 180 and be completely hands off? I'd be very surprised.

Either way, it's a pointless debate.

Why are you making this about 'completely hands off' versus 'meddling'?  There is a gulf between those.  

The owner has to make hires at the highest levels of the organization.  THEN, they step back and let those hires do their jobs.   

3 hours ago, TEW said:

Interesting take.

To push back a little for the sake of discussion (and to hopefully steer the blog towards something other than bishing and moaning), isn’t the bolded part true for all QBs? How many truly justify their draft position? I don’t know the answer to this, but I would guess it’s around 30%. Within that 30%, I’m curious to know what metrics correlate with a successful pick. I believe I read somewhere that being a 4 year starter was a good predictor of success, but I’m not sure of that.

On the other hand, what indication is there of a low football IQ? Is that a reputation of his or something you assume because of his lack of playing time (genuinely curious because I haven’t been able to follow the draft much this  off-season). Inexperience is one thing. Being raw mechanically is one thing. Not understanding the game is another. In the latter case, isn’t this what coaching is for?
 

Being incapable of learning is an entirely different thing and will doom the player, but Lance is 20 years old and by all accounts has a good work ethic. For me this is the real question: can he learn? Because the raw talent is there to be an All-Pro.

With Lance you are getting a QB that is basically starting his junior year at this point in his development.  His junior year was just played this spring and he opted out to prepare for the draft based on a stellar sophomore season against the likes of South Dakota, South Dakota State, Northern Iowa, etc.  In other words, he wasn’t facing NFL level defenses.  He may have a great work ethic.  So do a lot of players that never get drafted.  I agree that it is a crap shoot on drafting any QB but Lance is too much of a gamble for me at 12 with so many holes.  

Schwartz and crew marveled at Gerry’s understanding of the game but we all saw how that processing made him late to diagnose on the field.  In contrast, we see a player like TJ Edwards, who’s instincts give him a jump that somewhat compensates for pedestrian speed.  The trouble with Lance is there is as much a chance he is Anthony Morelli as Patrick Mahommes.  At this point, the Eagles need to avoid taking that level of a gamble.  

 

1 hour ago, austinfan said:

What mess? The rebuild was inevitable, it was delayed a year, but nothing could have stopped it. And 2020 was basically the same as a rebuilding year, they ended up with #6.

Howie already has 3 1sts (fingers crossed) in 2022 draft, 11 picks in this draft and Ertz still on the trading block.

A big part of the mess is the lack of young talent on the team, as a result of bad drafting by Howie.   So, forgive me for not leaping for joy that Howie likely will have 3 1st round picks to screw up next year instead of just one.   Without a doubt, Howie absolutely SCREWED UP the first round pick last year with Reagor over Jefferson, and it had absolutely NOTHING to do with drafting at #21... because Jefferson was clearly the better player and was sitting right there for the taking at #22.   

 

You say its easier to draft at #12 and #37 than #20 and #50... but that is ONLY true about #12.  If you can't make the right picks at #20, why should he be trusted at #37?  There will be over a dozen fewer options available at 37 than were at 20... and it was just another knee jerk overreaction to a new direction by Howie.  

 

We need big receivers... get 12 personnel, Jeffery, JJAW, etc.   
We need fast receivers... get Reagor, Hightower, Watkins and trade for Goodwin.   

 

3 hours ago, Khani1 said:

Anyone who is investing in crypto right now, congrats!  The market is exploding.

Tulips. 

Unpopular opinion: I'd sign Golden Tate for a reasonable price. Adam Caplan and Jason Avant have gone on and on about the team needing an "alpha" veteran presence at WR; Tate seems like that guy. Definitely better than Greg Ward.

10 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Why are you making this about 'completely hands off' versus 'meddling'?  There is a gulf between those.  

The owner has to make hires at the highest levels of the organization.  THEN, they step back and let those hires do their jobs.   

Only making high level hires and fires falls under completely hands off. The owner or ownership obviously have to do something.

You are making a simple scenario more complicated than it needs to be. If you think you can be 100% not involved in either assistant coaching hires, roster construction, or draft planning or anything else, fine. I'd bet the majority of people complaining about Lurie would meddle themselves and offer their opinions to some degree on football operations. That's it.

 

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Just because Jerry and Lurie does this, doesn't make it right.  No way Lurie did this when AR was here.  No chance.  

Who said it was right? There's a lot more than just those two that do it, by the way. 

9 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Unpopular opinion: I'd sign Golden Tate for a reasonable price. Adam Caplan and Jason Avant have gone on and on about the team needing an "alpha" veteran presence at WR; Tate seems like that guy. Definitely better than Greg Ward.

Nah, he's not the guy.  I'm sure a vet will be released that we can snatch up at some point.

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Only making high level hires and fires falls under completely hands off. The owner or ownership obviously have to do something.

You are making a simple scenario more complicated than it needs to be. If you think you can be 100% not involved in either assistant coaching hires, roster construction, or draft planning or anything else, fine. I'd bet the majority of people complaining about Lurie would meddle themselves and offer their opinions to some degree on football operations. That's it.

 

I have my opinions, but I am not a 'football guy'.  Lurie is not a football guy.   Lurie needs to know his limits.   He doesn't have to work with the assistant coaches on a day to day basis, the HC does.   That's the HC's domain.  The roster construction should be something that is discussed in the general sense by the GM with the owner during the interview.  Getting into the nitty gritty of signings, trades, and cutting players (outside of players that put the organization in a bad light, like the original Michael Vick signing) should not be an area the owner gets involved in.  Talk about liking aggressive defense, 3-4 vs. 4-3, passing offense, what you see the identity of the team to be with the GM.  Then, let the GM do his job.  Draft planning is something the owner should be involved in?   No.  Thats the scouting department taking what the coaches want and distilling it down, the owner just gets in the way (as we've seen).  

 

I'm self-aware enough to know that I know my limitations, and while I can have some strong opinions on here, the reality is that given the actual opportunity to own a team, I would let the football people I hire do their jobs.  I might sit in and be 'in the conversation', but I wouldn't be pulling rank and forcing my moves on to the team.

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

Blech. 

vs.

8 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Just because Jerry and Lurie does this, doesn't make it right.  No way Lurie did this when AR was here.  No chance.  

Chip scrambled his brains.

1 hour ago, olsilverhair said:

Shutup freshbuttermilk

FYP

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I have my opinions, but I am not a 'football guy'.  Lurie is not a football guy.   Lurie needs to know his limits.   He doesn't have to work with the assistant coaches on a day to day basis, the HC does.   That's the HC's domain.  The roster construction should be something that is discussed in the general sense by the GM with the owner during the interview.  Getting into the nitty gritty of signings, trades, and cutting players (outside of players that put the organization in a bad light, like the original Michael Vick signing) should not be an area the owner gets involved in.  Talk about liking aggressive defense, 3-4 vs. 4-3, passing offense, what you see the identity of the team to be with the GM.  Then, let the GM do his job.  Draft planning is something the owner should be involved in?   No.  Thats the scouting department taking what the coaches want and distilling it down, the owner just gets in the way (as we've seen).  

 

I'm self-aware enough to know that I know my limitations, and while I can have some strong opinions on here, the reality is that given the actual opportunity to own a team, I would let the football people I hire do their jobs.  I might sit in and be 'in the conversation', but I wouldn't be pulling rank and forcing my moves on to the team.

Fair enough. I would 100% meddle. Not to the degree that I'm defacto GM but if my coach is too afraid to fire Carson Walch or Press Taylor after multiple years of failure, I'm telling him they need to go. If the GM is a lunatic who wants to spend a 2nd round pick on a project QB not even one year after signing the current QB to a franchise record extension, I'm also telling him no.

6 hours ago, garingovt2000 said:

Traded Ertz, 37, and 70 for 33 and 65.  Which option do you like better..

 

 

 

 

Option 2 

 

Option 2 in a landslide.  Option 1 made me punch the dog.  

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Fair enough. I would 100% meddle. Not to the degree that I'm defacto GM but if my coach is too afraid to fire Carson Walch or Press Taylor after multiple years of failure, I'm telling him they need to go. If the GM is a lunatic who wants to spend a 2nd round pick on a project QB not even one year after signing the current QB to a franchise record extension, I'm also telling him no.

If I don't trust the people in charge of their areas of influence, then I would replace them.  But I wouldn't tell them what to do while they were in that position.

7 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

vs.

I don’t mind Chazz Surratt as a Round 5 LB prospect if he lasts that long.  Perhaps he can room with Dillard on the road and they can forge a camaraderie watching Beaches or Little Women or something.

I actually like Sage Surratt’s tape as well, FWIW

Ian Rapoport

 

@RapSheet

·

27m

 

 

Random draft quote from an experienced top evaluator: "This draft is unprecedented in its sheer number of really good slot WRs.” Last year’s WR class was deep, but more outside guys. This year, it’s top inside guys.

2 minutes ago, Original Sin said:

Ian Rapoport

 

@RapSheet

·

27m

 

 

Random draft quote from an experienced top evaluator: "This draft is unprecedented in its sheer number of really good slot WRs.” Last year’s WR class was deep, but more outside guys. This year, it’s top inside guys.

 

There's nothing that Howie loves more than a slot WR.  

Just now, RememberTheKoy said:

 

There's nothing that Howie loves more than a slot WR.  

Slot CB

5 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Lets be real about this, if any of us owned an NFL team, we all would meddle the ish out of it too.

I'd have triple monitors on draft day in the war room that would be occupied by me only.  PFF on screen #1, TDN on screen #2, and the blog on screen #3.  All my decisions would be magnificent and catered towards the intelligent folks from the blog.    

1 hour ago, austinfan said:

What mess? The rebuild was inevitable, it was delayed a year, but nothing could have stopped it. And 2020 was basically the same as a rebuilding year, they ended up with #6.

Howie already has 3 1sts (fingers crossed) in 2022 draft, 11 picks in this draft and Ertz still on the trading block.

And it's a heck of a lot easier drafting at #12 and #37 than 20+ and 50+.

The real key is whether Sirianni is the right HC for a rebuild, and we'll have a good idea in two years. If he can turn players like JJAW, Jackson, etc. into assets, he's the right guy.

It's a mess if we hit 2023 and we've barely added talent, and have to look forward to a decade like the Giants (6 10+ game losing seasons in 10 years after winning a SB).

I don't know whether a rebuild was inevitable.  I think a rebuild became unavoidable because of poor roster management.  There was very little rebuilding done in 2020.  There is little in the way of promising talent that looks foundational.  The team traded away picks for an ageing CB.  The team got little return on their draft picks despite having 7 in the draft.  I don't think all was lost but the picks they gave up for Slay could have been used to potentially move up for Cee Dee Lamb.  The team also could have taken Julius Blackmon or Cameron Dantzler at 85 I think both of those rookies would make me feel better about the secondary then where they sit now.  

I agree Sirianni is an unknown and he may be a wunderkind that is able to make the team great.  I don't feel as if the team is heading into 2022 with the light at the end of the tunnel.  If Hurts looks the part of an above-average QB, then the team can utilize those picks to fill holes at other positions.  If Hurts looks mediocre or worse, those assets are going towards QB.  Hurts looking mediocre would be an improvement over last season.  

5 minutes ago, hputenis said:

I'd have triple monitors on draft day in the war room that would be occupied by me only.  PFF on screen #1, TDN on screen #2, and the blog on screen #3.  All my decisions would be magnificent and catered towards the intelligent folks from the blog.    

with enough booze and coke to make Jim Irsay blush