4 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

In some cases, what appears to be reality IS reality.  Don't overthink it.  Everyone here follows this team closely enough to read the writing on the wall.

AR was Lurie's 2nd hire.  He was a little under the radar, was not a coordinator...and Lurie hit it big with a guy who had that binder, a master plan, and knew what he was doing.  Lurie didn't meddle.  Everyone knows AR ran that team and the drafts.

After 2010, Lurie became inpatient with AR because, well, so did everyone else.  Do you think Andy freaking Reid wanted a 34 year old Howie Roseman, who never played football in his life, to be named GM?  Why the heck do you think Lurie did that?  He was telling AR: it's been a decade.  You haven't gotten over the hump.  Now I'm getting involved.

Then the bottom falls out with AR.  In 2013, a change of scenery was necessary for both sides.  Lurie isn't quite ready or motivated to pull all the strings.  He and Howie go after the sexiest name on the market, Chip Kelly...a big personality with a controlling plan.  AR left a void and they looked to fill it with another HC's plan rather than their own.  And that plan was horrible.  Chip was a disaster.

Enter Doug Pederson.  "Emotional intelligence."  This was the real power move from Lowie.  They saw how AR executed his plan.  Lurie oversaw a few duds as HCs at this point.  And that's when Lowie figured they knew better than anyone else.  Find that "oh gosh jolly sucks" likable guy to stand at the podium and give speeches while Lowie did the rest behind the seens.  Find and dictate the positional coaches who are philosophically aligned with what you want, rather than risk the coach taking things in a direction you dislike.  Then, both Lowie AND Doug were emboldened by the SB win.  Doug figured he didn't need to take direction from anyone, and Lowie figured they had this thing figured out.  When things went south in 2019-2020, they blamed each other.  When Doug outright refused to take direction from above, he was then fired.

Siriani was hired to be Doug circa 2016.

Conspiracy theory guy?  I think Pederson was the guy left available who fit the team, AR's recommendation, could fix the wounds left behind by Chip.

Then they saw him in action in 2016, I don't think it had anything to do with "direction."  Think what freaked out Lowie was Wentz regressing from a great start, first 4 games, 67% complete, 7-1 TD/Int ratio. After that, 61% complete, 9-13 ratio. You just invested all these assets and your star rookie QB is going backwards!

Reich, don't know the connection, Duce (Eagles), DeFilippo (?), Lewis (Eagles coaching intern 2012), Peele TE (retained), Stoutland (retained), CHung TE/OL (with Eagles and KC with Doug), Taylor (retained), Fipp (retained). Doubt Doug had much to say about defensive coach hiring.

Doug got fired when he came into the post-season interview and wanted another shot at the playoffs, given most of the moves on offense the last three seasons were probably dictated by Doug's requests (Doug knew DeSean as QB coach on the Eagles, and lobbied to keep the SB team together, and probably lobbied for a deep threat in the draft last year), enough was enough. They wanted how he'd deal with a rebuild, and he was in total denial.

Sirianni is far more prepared than Doug, longer coaching pedigree, has worked with multiple WRs and QBs. Given the circumstances under which he was hired, doubt it was to be a puppet, rather, Lurie wanted someone like young AR, with a detailed plan. Stoutland and Morehead are the only coaches he retained, the others have little or no connection to Lowie. And keeping Stoutland was a no-brainer, I expect an extension at some point this summer.

 

Crossing routes sound great for Quez Watkins. And Reagor. 

I think Quez can potentially handle the slot. Reagor would be helped by playing slot, and Z so he doesnt have to worry much about beating press. 

Need an X. In a space offense, DeVante Smith would be great. Bateman and Marshall. But like some of the colts WRs, this may be where you see us go for the size WR. Nico Collins, or Simi Fehoko. 

A slot thats been forgotten about is Demetric Felton. RB/Slot/Return versatility. Good speed and excellent elusiveness.  And one thats basically never been talked about and is a poor mans Amari Rodgers who will go much later is JD Spielman.

 

3 hours ago, BigEFly said:

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.  

Fair enough. I suppose Lance would be best fit for a team with a solid roster and an aging but established starter at QB.

But I'm sort of thinking that this might actually be the time to gamble. We have low expectations and a bevy of future assets. Let's assume that Hurts is not the answer. I hope he is, but I think if we are all being honest with ourselves, we don't expect him to become a 10 year starter who makes a bunch of pro bowls. If Lance takes 2 years before you have a good grasp on if he's "the guy" or not, you could just convert some of the 2022 draft capital into 2023 or 2024 first rounders to give you an "out." If Lance works out, great, you have tons of picks to quickly improve. If he doesn't, you have the capital to bring in the new guy without mortgaging the future and you can still fill in the rest of the roster because of the premium received for low time preference. 

Basically, I think this move gives you more chances at a franchise QB without lowering the 3 year window on roster improvement.

The only way you take Lance at 12 is if the scouts and Johnson are in love, not like. That is, they're pretty sure he's the real thing, and not just a hope and a prayer.

13 minutes ago, TEW said:

Fair enough. I suppose Lance would be best fit for a team with a solid roster and an aging but established starter at QB.

But I'm sort of thinking that this might actually be the time to gamble. We have low expectations and a bevy of future assets. Let's assume that Hurts is not the answer. I hope he is, but I think if we are all being honest with ourselves, we don't expect him to become a 10 year starter who makes a bunch of pro bowls. If Lance takes 2 years before you have a good grasp on if he's "the guy" or not, you could just convert some of the 2022 draft capital into 2023 or 2024 first rounders to give you an "out." If Lance works out, great, you have tons of picks to quickly improve. If he doesn't, you have the capital to bring in the new guy without mortgaging the future and you can still fill in the rest of the roster because of the premium received for low time preference. 

Basically, I think this move gives you more chances at a franchise QB without lowering the 3 year window on roster improvement.

You end up losing the cheap years of his contract

this is not the time to shove on a qb. Play small ball and build your stack. Be patient

Apparently the Eagles had a 3rd Rd grade on Hurts, but they took him in the 2nd due to FOMO.

So ask yourself, is a 3rd Rd graded QB worth passing on a top 10 rated QB?

That's why I think if Lance or Fields are there at #12 , they pounce.

1 minute ago, D-Shiznit said:

Apparently they had a 3rd Rd grade on Hurts, but they took him in the 2nd due to FOMO.

So ask yourself, is a 3rd Rd graded QB worth passing on a top 10 rated QB?

That's why I think if Lance or Fields is there at #12 , they pounce.

I like Fields alot. But no neither of them are guys you MUST have

8 minutes ago, D-Shiznit said:

Apparently the Eagles had a 3rd Rd grade on Hurts, but they took him in the 2nd due to FOMO.

So ask yourself, is a 3rd Rd graded QB worth passing on a top 10 rated QB?

That's why I think if Lance or Fields is there at #12 , they pounce.

What is it about the NFL draft that makes people completely lose their minds? You act as if there is zero new information to be gathered having a player in the building for a year. 

17 minutes ago, austinfan said:

The only way you take Lance at 12 is if the scouts and Johnson are in love, not like. That is, they're pretty sure he's the real thing, and not just a hope and a prayer.

I can’t imagine they love him if they traded out of 6. 

15 minutes ago, D-Shiznit said:

Apparently the Eagles had a 3rd Rd grade on Hurts, but they took him in the 2nd due to FOMO.

So ask yourself, is a 3rd Rd graded QB worth passing on a top 10 rated QB?

That's why I think if Lance or Fields are there at #12 , they pounce.

It’s hard to know but I do put stock in the reports that Lurie wants Hurts to get a year. 

17 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I can’t imagine they love him if they traded out of 6. 

Yep, but the Eagles do illogical crap like that all the time.  You don't draft a QB in round 1 unless you think he's your franchise guy...and you don't trade down in round 1 to draft a QB...that means you don't think he is THAT good.  So common sense would cross QB off our board.  But who knows with this group?

7 hours ago, greend said:

Sure, but I sure as hell don't chastise them for a win because we didn't do it my way. 

Setting aside the inflammatory word "chastise," bad decisions that end in good results are still bad decisions. You can minimize your chances at winning and still win.

Bad sequences of decisions should be scrutinized even if they happen to end with positive results.

The reason you stress process over results, good process usually leads to good results, but good results by themselves may simply be a fluke.

41 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

You end up losing the cheap years of his contract

this is not the time to shove on a qb. Play small ball and build your stack. Be patient

True, you'll only get 2 years of the QB in his prime on cheap cap hits. But does it really matter that much if you end up with a franchise QB?

As far as pushing the chips in on a QB, I see it completely differently than you. I would see this move as the opposite of shoving chips into the middle of the table on 1 QB. I'm viewing this as a calculated bet to minimize draft capital for high potential QBs and optionality. Using a #12 and third on a QB with his potential is not that big of an investment. I mean, compare it to the presumptive alternative: we go into next offseason and pull the trigger on a megatrade to get a top 2 pick. Or we are so bad we use our own pick which happens to be top 2. Either way, that's a far bigger outlay of draft capital AND it minimizes the roster around the QB.

If we are looking at a multi-year rebuild, I think we would maximize our chances at finding a franchise QB with a small trade up for Lance AND the optionality of pushing picks from 2022 into 2023, while also maximizing the improvement of the rest of the roster from the "draft dividends" of differed gratification than we would using 2021's draft capital to fill out the roster and then pushing all our chips into the middle for 1 QB next year and living/dying by his development.

2 minutes ago, austinfan said:

The reason you stress process over results, good process usually leads to good results, but good results by themselves may simply be a fluke.

Exactly.

My random thought of the day. Some players are being put into a difficult and frankly unfair choice between the NFL and NFLPA in regards to OTAs. With the NFLPA telling all players to boycott any onsite activities, what is a player like Hurts supposed to do? He probably knows this is his main shot to be the guy and if he is a hard worker, he probably would and should be getting as much time with the coaching staff to succeed. But he basically has to go with the mob of veterans that don’t feel like doing it or else it looks like he’s not a team leader and turning his back on the association.

51 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Yep, but the Eagles do illogical crap like that all the time.  You don't draft a QB in round 1 unless you think he's your franchise guy...and you don't trade down in round 1 to draft a QB...that means you don't think he is THAT good.  So common sense would cross QB off our board.  But who knows with this group?

It's only illogical if you know the rules of logic.  If you don't... what the Eagles do is absolutely a logical progression of one genius move to the next.

1 hour ago, HazletonEagle said:

 

I read that he returned for another year at TCU. 

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

It's only illogical if you know the rules of logic.  If you don't... what the Eagles do is absolutely a logical progression of one genius move to the next.

They’d just say that he was the guy all along and that they were confident in their intel that he would be there at 12. 

Lowie harped on process over results in obvious run-first situations yet have led a process that ended with the owner making a second round pick (and passing on a higher ranked player at the same position) during a lively discussion while on the clock and the GM deciding to overrule his scouting department to take a backup QB over higher ranked players on their board. 

Yep, the ultimate process over results franchise. 

3 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

They’d just say that he was the guy all along and that they were confident in their intel that he would be there at 12. 

Yup.  Howie rolled the dice and won... again!   Like that time he traded back and landed the coveted Marcus Smith II!  

1 minute ago, ManuManu said:

Lowie harped on process over results in obvious run-first situations yet have led a process that ended with the owner making a second round pick (and passing on a higher ranked player at the same position) during a lively discussion while on the clock and the GM deciding to overrule his scouting department to take a backup QB over higher ranked players on their board. 

Yep, the ultimate process over results franchise. 

Me personally, I like the process of the analytics staffers ostracizing the football staff and completely ignoring their recommendations. That's good process. 

1 minute ago, schuy7 said:

Me personally, I like the process of the analytics staffers ostracizing the football staff and completely ignoring their recommendations. That's good process. 

The football guys are not to refer to the analytics staff by their Christian names or to look them in the eyes unless they get a yearly subscription to Sharp Football Analysis and have logged 50 hours on the website. 

24 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yup.  Howie rolled the dice and won... again!   Like that time he traded back and landed the coveted Marcus Smith II!  

I'm 50/50 on this trade.  If the board breaks as expected and other teams trading up for qb's are mostly uneventful, I think it was a sound move.  If there is a run on QB's and someone trades into 6 or 7 for more than we got in the first place, it has the potential to look silly.

But the kiss of death...even if Howie drafts the guy I want...is if they say "John Smith was the guy we were going to draft at #6 anyway."

If they say that, you might as well cut the guy in training camp.  Don't even waste the roster spot.

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

I'm 50/50 on this trade.  If the board breaks as expected and other teams trading up for qb's are mostly uneventful, I think it was a sound move.  If there is a run on QB's and someone trades into 6 or 7 for more than we got in the first place, it has the potential to look silly.

But the kiss of death...even if Howie drafts the guy I want...is if they say "John Smith was the guy we were going to draft at #6 anyway."

If they say that, you might as well cut the guy in training camp.  Don't even waste the roster spot.

I'm not against the trade.  I am against a trade up for a guy like Lance at 8, as hypothesized, or even taking him at 12.

 

Ultimately, if Lance was their guy all along, then you stay at 6 and take him.  If they take him at 12 it just signals that they are once again being reactive and reactionary rather than proactive and carrying out a plan.  But they don't do that, they just roll in the waves, they never make the waves.