Eagles-Cardinals is on NFLN right now for those who hate themselves. 

46 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

As WR is the most frequently and heavily scrutinized position in Philly, I wanted to just circle back and review/debate what we have.  I usually see things very differently than most, so I expect some entertaining dissent.  In rank order of my level of interest:

1. Jalen Reagor.  I am not ashamed to say I liked this pick.  Didn't like the value, but I was happy with the pick.  His disappointing combine was sort of a harbinger of things to come, as I was very disappointed with both his game speed and production as a rookie.  He just didn't seem fast or quick and ran sluggish routes.  Just a really disappointing year.  But...I still really do like his game film from college.  He really did look like he was full speed while everyone else was in slow motion.  The Desean Jackson comps didn't seem so crazy.  I hate excuses, but perhaps his long string of injuries as a rookie did slow him down.  I am still hopeful and I still believe in his potential, for now.  He still might have that raw, rare explosion and speed talent that so many teams covet in WRs.  We'll see.  But for now, I want him to be a big part of the plans moving forward.  He just needs to do a better job getting open and getting deep.

Where he should play:  When I was really high on Reagor, I wanted him as an X.  He has a sturdy frame...and if he can move the way his college tape suggests and run all the routes, then he might be able to do more high volume damage as an X.  If you want to simplify things for him, then it would be the slot or Z.

2. Quez Watkins.  Yep.  E45 and his speed.  It's not about the 40.  I get that he's raw.  In college, he ran mostly crossing routes that were just rudimentary sprints.  He needs to learn the route tree.  He's still only 22.  He has unteachable, elite linear deep speed AND excellent short area quicks/footwork (just watch that TD against AZ where he juked 2 tackles, spun, and then outran the whole defense).  There are only so many guys in the NFL that have the sheer movement talent to make that play.  If they can teach him to run routes, there may be something to work with here.  I hope his rawness doesn't allow him to fall through the cracks with a young coaching staff that might favor safer, more polished options.

Where he should play: Seems like a prototypical Z.  Depending on where Reagor settles and what additions are made, the slot may be his best opportunity.  His quickness will serve him well there, although most slot WRs have a little bulk/physicality to them.

3. Fulgham.  You all know my opinion of Fulgham.  I truly think he's a regular season Nasty Nate deserving of his own award in his name.  I think he's just bad and never expect him to ascend to that fluke 4 game stretch again.  Best case scenario is that he's a slower Jordan Matthews.  If we do invest in more speed that lacks size at the WR position, I am interested in seeing Fulgham continue to develop as a situational physical option for certain matchups.  But we are going to have problems if they try to develop him as an every down player.

Where he should play: X/slot.

4. Hightower.  I may like speed, but sometimes fast WR's can suck too.  Hightower will be a raw, 25 year old 2nd year player when the season starts.  His deep speed is good, not rare.  His style of play resembles Todd Pinkston with worse hands.  He's a rail.  He can get deep when you give him a runway, but he really doesn't have much lateral agility to actually generate separation on much besides go-routes.  He also seems like an Agholor-esque deer in headlights when tracking deep balls too.  And since the deep ball is all he's really physically suited for, that's a huge problem.  He'll have 1-2 "told you so" 60 yard TD's per year...and he'll be a huge liability the rest of the time.

Where he should play: 1-dimensional backup Z.

5. Ward.  Not much to say here; he's already been debated to death.  If he is top 2 (or top 1, as it may be) in receptions again, the Eagles should probably be contracted into the Canadian Football League.  But their inability to get talent in the lineup in this position will continue to leave Ward deserving of targets.  He stands in the right place, runs the right routes, and has good hands.  He combines small stature with horrible movement talent, so that's why his typical role is to catch 6 yard passes on 3rd and 10.  But he'll be a safety valve in the slot if we can't find anyone better.

Where he should play: slot.

Unranked:

JJAW.  

I agree with most of this except I believe Reagor should be the Z or slot receiver and that he doesn't have the frame to be dependable at the X. Well written and thought out.

27 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

Classic overthink. Don't wanna hear about the 1st round OL success rate compared to WR or CB. You don't pass up a potential star at WR or CB for a damn guard. Would be next level stupid.

13 minutes ago, Slade said:

I agree with most of this except I believe Reagor should be the Z or slot receiver and that he doesn't have the frame to be dependable at the X. Well written and thought out.

I don't think he'll ever be a dedicated X (nor should he be). I think his skillset makes him a valuable interchangeable chess piece. If he becomes a dominant WR in the league, it'll be because he's equally effective playing all the positions. 

2 hours ago, Mike030270 said:

Is there a list somewhere of all the teams refusing voluntary practice?

 

2 hours ago, SNOORDA said:

Ill say this.  The nfce was the laughing stock of the NFL last year and any of those 4 teams should be ashamed to skip any opportunity to improve 

Is it even practice though?  I always thought it was just working out, doing some running, lifting weights, etc. to get guys in shape.  Is there actual coaching, scheming, game planning going on during these voluntary workouts?

3 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Classic overthink. Don't wanna hear about the 1st round OL success rate compared to WR or CB. You don't pass up a potential star at WR or CB for a damn guard. Would be next level stupid.

Not sure about Vera Tucker but I've heard Slater can play several positions on the O-line.  I can maybe see him at 12 but not the Trojan.

1 minute ago, Saltpeter said:

Classic overthink. Don't wanna hear about the 1st round OL success rate compared to WR or CB. You don't pass up a potential star at WR or CB for a damn guard. Would be next level stupid.

Especially on a team that sorely lacks explosive playmakers. 

Scheme can only take you so far. At some point, you need players that transcend schematic advantages/disadvantages. 

4 minutes ago, 315Eagles said:

Not sure about Vera Tucker but I've heard Slater can play several positions on the O-line.  I can maybe see him at 12 but not the Trojan.

Versatility should be irrelevant at #12.  In that range, a player needs to actually excel in a position and have a plan to settle into the lineup, regardless of where it might be.

 

9 minutes ago, Giddyunc said:

Especially on a team that sorely lacks explosive playmakers. 

Scheme can only take you so far. At some point, you need players that transcend schematic advantages/disadvantages. 

I’ve heard that Siriani "schemes WRs open” whereas Doug does not.  What a croc.  As if certain coaches want their WRs to be open while others do not.  

Just now, eagle45 said:

I’ve heard that Siriani "schemes WRs open” whereas Doug does not.  What a croc.  As if certain coaches want their WRs to be open while others do not.  

I don’t think it’s a crock at all. We ran a lot of iso routes. That forces your receivers to win 1 on 1, which they pathetically couldn’t. Schemed open means you’re putting the defense in conflict and creating openings based on disguise, route concepts, etc. 

I defended Doug quite a bit until about midseason. At that point he completely fell apart. Everything was so stale. 

If the Eagles are drafting OL anywhere in the first 3 rounds I think I prefer they just take a C  for Kelce to mentor.  Wouldn’t be surprised if the Eagles have asked Hurts for his impressions on Creed Humphrey in case he’s on the board at #37.  Josh Myers is another C who could be there in the 3rd round or later.  Dickerson has a long injury history.  Unfortunately there just aren’t any C in this draft who can block at the second level like Kelce does.

I much prefer the Eagles get some skill position players with their first 4 picks, though — CB, WR, S all need a talent boost, and Stoutland can develop guys in the 3rd round and later. 

23 minutes ago, 315Eagles said:

Not sure about Vera Tucker but I've heard Slater can play several positions on the O-line.  I can maybe see him at 12 but not the Trojan.

Sure, I wouldn't hate the team picking Slater. I think he provides you with a high-end starter for the next 10 years at 4 positions across the OL and hedges you against a Lane injury or a Mailata regression or a Dillard faceplant. I'd rather them pick the WR or CB likely staring them right in the face, but at least I'd get it.

A Vera-Tucker pick is completely different. It's basically Pro Bowl or bust because he can only play guard, a non-premium position. Again, would be next level stupid and representative of all the issues this team has with analytics (OL success rate vs WRs/CBs) and overthinking.

I just landed in Dallas and have a three hour layover here. I feel gross. 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

 

I am on board for Slater

the other isnt good for 12

My fear is that Howie and co. will over think this situation at number 12, which is the main reason they have been so bad in the draft. Take ONE of Surtain, Horn, Waddle, and Smith and it's a money pick. In the very unlikely scenario where all four of them are gone take Slater, or trade back just a little bit and take Paye or Vera Tucker. Seems pretty simple......

20 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t think it’s a crock at all. We ran a lot of iso routes. That forces your receivers to win 1 on 1, which they pathetically couldn’t. Schemed open means you’re putting the defense in conflict and creating openings based on disguise, route concepts, etc. 

Other than called WR screens, few plays were designed to get WRs open. Now, Doug could get TEs open quite well. WRs though? Nope. 

1. Jags - Lawrence

2. Jets - Wilson

3. 49'ers - Jones or Fields

4. - Falcons / trade up - Fields or Lance

Some combination of Chase, Pitts, and Sewell should go 5, 6, and 7. That leaves Surtain, Horn, Waddle, Smith, and Slater with four picks left to be made until the Eagles are up. Even in the worst case scenario one of those five will be left and there's a good chance that a 5th QB and/or Parsons go which pushes one or two more of them down to the Eagles. If Howie gets nervous he can always try to jump the NY and Dallas and move up to 9 which should only cost 70 meaning the net gain of both trades is a 3 this year for a 1 next year. Either way, they shouldn't be able to screw this up but they probably will by taking Vera-Tucker or Barmore at 12.

24 minutes ago, blindside said:

I just landed in Dallas and have a three hour layover here. I feel gross. 

From what I hear, Dallas is a great city. The issues the fans, specifically, fans who aren’t from Dallas 

Just now, EaglePhan1986 said:

From what I hear, Dallas is a great city. The issues the fans, specifically, fans who aren’t from Dallas 

I love visiting Dallas. It’s a great city. 

Slater I wouldn't be pissed about. Tucker would be a reach 

If Horn, Smith, or Waddle are there, you gotta take a shot with one of those guys.

 

On a side note, it is lake weather today!

Slater would give the Eagles optionality as he can be both an OT and an OG like Zack Martin. 

8 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

From what I hear, Dallas is a great city. The issues the fans, specifically, fans who aren’t from Dallas 

Well, in fairness, I’ve never visited. And I can definitely attest to the last part of what you said. 

Looks like my daily view, off my deck

46 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t think it’s a crock at all. We ran a lot of iso routes. That forces your receivers to win 1 on 1, which they pathetically couldn’t. Schemed open means you’re putting the defense in conflict and creating openings based on disguise, route concepts, etc. 

I defended Doug quite a bit until about midseason. At that point he completely fell apart. Everything was so stale. 

Um, yeah. Does the dude you are quoting know a single thing about football. All he has to do is watch a team like the 49'ers to understand what scheming a WR open is. The fact is that most teams are playing their defense in a way that tries to take away the big plays and is willing to give up the short stuff to keep things in front of them. Doug's offense was primarily vertical routes that were mid range to deep. Considering their OL was banged up and playing poorly all year it was moronic to continue running the offense that way. When you factor in stuff like this, the lack of run calls, and serious lack of player development over the last couple of years it can't be said enough how poorly Pederson did as the head coach. The players liked him and he was a good motivator but from an X's and O's perspective, other than catching lightning in a bottle in 2017 he was not a good coach.

Let’s not start posting views. I don’t want to flex on y’all 😂😂 (I kid, I don’t own the place, I just live there.)