It was always Brady in New England all pats coaches fail, Vrabel wasn’t a coach but they have hit their ceiling anyway.

8 hours ago, Ace Nova said:

There's so much wrong in this post that I don't have the time nor the energy to start a debate over it. 

That said, the NFL is a performance based league.  Doug Pederson will likely get an opportunity to "redeem" himself at some point in the future and when he likely does, you can come back and review your post for what it is - nothing more than an il-informed hit piece. . 

Many of the same things that you are saying here about Pederson were said about Andy Reid during his last few years here and after he left.  He's gone on to make the playoffs 7 out of 8 years since his departure, including 3 AFC Championship games and a Super Bowl title. 

If Pederson does half of what Reid has accomplished, after he leaves here, that would be more than enough to prove his naysayers wrong, imo. 

AR left b/c his head wasn't into it after his son died, it was more a mutual agreement that he needed a fresh start somewhere else. Understandable.

Pederson is not AR, I never got the sense that he really understood what the job entailed, his strength was managing a veteran clubhouse, his weakness was managing and finding the right assistants. Was he even involved with the defense?

2 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Agholor was typecast as a slot WR here, goes to Gruden, becomes a "Y" and a legitimate deep threat.

Player was the same, coach was different.

Watkins is explosive, Hightower is fast, Reagor has Maclin type separation skills (i.e. doesn't look that fast but why is the CB two steps behind?). Ward is a good slot WR who gets open on 3rd down and catches the ball. Fulgham is a big body who can snatch in a crowd. A good coach doesn't force them to be what they're not, but works on making them better at what they do well. So you don't call WR screens for Ward when you have Watkins and Reagor. You try to teach Hightower how to locate and high point, teach Fulgham to use his strength to beat the press and so on.

And?  I said coaching was one of the two biggest culprits... and I said they haven't hit on a WR in 5 years.  Agholor was 2015, which was prior to that 5 year window.   Since Wentz has come, what pick has hit at the WR position?   

You can teach these guys... if they had the right coaches in place.  So far, they haven't... so coaching?  I go with both/and rather than either/or.   You seem to like the neither/nor.  

Hmm.

Lots of OSU players haven't made a decision yet.

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

And?  I said coaching was one of the two biggest culprits... and I said they haven't hit on a WR in 5 years.  Agholor was 2015, which was prior to that 5 year window.   Since Wentz has come, what pick has hit at the WR position?   

You can teach these guys... if they had the right coaches in place.  So far, they haven't... so coaching?  I go with both/and rather than either/or.   You seem to like the neither/nor.  

Arcega-Whiteside, obviously.

5 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

I gotta say, I am not too excited about the idea we are interviewing everyone under the sun.  Especially since we all know, they have no real interest in at least half of the people they have met or plan to meet with.  It's either really arrogant or desperate (I know quite the disparity).  I would rather they know who their guy is and narrow their focus on him.  It's reminiscent of the last coaching search and when they settled on Doug.  Obviously, it worked and we got our SB.  But it's not like he was a hot candidate around the league.  That being said, I don't think anything happens this week, unless it is McDaniel's.  

I think it's great that they interview everyone, teams that fixate on a "hot coach" go into the interview ready to buy anything he sells. How many "hot coaching candidates" fail? Most.

By casting a wide net, you get a lot of useful information about your team, potential assistant coaches, philosophical approach to schemes, etc.

And if you interview someone and you don't get useful information, well, that makes it easy to cross them off your list (you have no opinion on our roster? you have no idea who you'd hire as your OC and DC and assistant coaches? Get outta here!).

And every so often a surprise candidate comes into the interview and shows he's ready and loaded for bear. AR and his binder.

1 minute ago, austinfan said:

I think it's great that they interview everyone, teams that fixate on a "hot coach" go into the interview ready to buy anything he sells. How many "hot coaching candidates" fail? Most.

By casting a wide net, you get a lot of useful information about your team, potential assistant coaches, philosophical approach to schemes, etc.

And if you interview someone and you don't get useful information, well, that makes it easy to cross them off your list (you have no opinion on our roster? you have no idea who you'd hire as your OC and DC and assistant coaches? Get outta here!).

And every so often a surprise candidate comes into the interview and shows he's ready and loaded for bear. AR and his binder.

Of course, the downside of a protracted process is that you lose viable candidates as other teams make hires.

29 minutes ago, DawkinsOwnage03 said:

I guess McDaniels said no to Wentz and now we are stuck with Bowles, lol. Priceless 

Maclane just tweeted that he thinks McD is the front runner. 

Just now, Solomon said:

Maclane just tweeted that he thinks McD is the front runner. 

Of course McClane is an idiot sooooooooooo?

Just now, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Of course you do.  

He is.  But I agree with him and said so last night.  

You agree that McDaniels is a front runner?  I do not, but either way it's just opinions. As well as McClane is just opinions.

If it ends up being McDaniels I won't like it but, I've been wrong plenty so I'm willing to see how it goes.

7 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

And?  I said coaching was one of the two biggest culprits... and I said they haven't hit on a WR in 5 years.  Agholor was 2015, which was prior to that 5 year window.   Since Wentz has come, what pick has hit at the WR position?   

You can teach these guys... if they had the right coaches in place.  So far, they haven't... so coaching?  I go with both/and rather than either/or.   You seem to like the neither/nor.  

Well, it's not like they've drafted a lot of guys, Reagor and JJAW, other than that Hollins (4th), Hightower (5th), Watkins (6th), Gibson (6th), Ward (UDFA).

Chip picked Matthews (2nd) and Agholor (1st). But that's ancient history.

yardage leaders:

Diggs #146

Adams #53

Hopkins #27

Waller (TE) #204

Kelce (TE) #63

Robinson #61

Allen #76

Lockett #69

Smith-Schuster #62

Anderson UDFA

Maybe instead of picking Smith or Chase, we should trade down 3 or 4 times and draft a half dozen WRs between the 2nd and 4th round?

9 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

Of course, the downside of a protracted process is that you lose viable candidates as other teams make hires.

That assumes an easily recognized pecking order ex ante. That is, the candidates you lose are better than the ones that are left.

It would be interesting if someone did a study of coaching hires and see whether early hires were more successful than later hires.

My suspicion is that it's pretty random.

If you are interviewing a bunch of candidates, and none blow you away, the fact that other teams hire them before your second interview probably doesn't matter since in that case they're all "meh."

Law firms hire lots of bright young associates from top schools, though my experience is that most law partners are mediocre intellects, every so often I came across one that was head and shoulders above the crowd, but they're rare. Probably the same with most coaching candidates, they all have some success on their resume or they wouldn't get interviewed, but most are probably similar in that they don't jump out at you as special.

1 hour ago, Swoop said:

Care to elaborate?

No 

27 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

You left out your boy, Arcega-Whiteside.

He'll be a great H-back some day. Just needs a coach to recognize that. 😎

2 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Yes, I do.  And I think he's one of the most qualified candidates out there.  I know it's vogue in here to hate everything New England.  I think that's pretty simple minded.  Also, it's not a giant leap to assume the guy who conceivably had the longest interview process is the front runner.  

Him being from N.E. has nothing to do with anything, although N.E. assistants  don't seem to make great head coaches.  Oh and yeah that long interview doesn't make me comfortable but it's still just your opinion.

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Yes, I do.  And I think he's one of the most qualified candidates out there.  I know it's vogue in here to hate everything New England.  I think that's pretty simple minded.  

He’s definitely qualified.  I’m not even against Patricia per se as a DC; he got good results in NE, and just because Slay couldn’t stand him as a HC doesn’t necessarily mean the two can’t exist together with him not the main guy.

Adam Gase as OC wouldn’t make me feel very good, though.

Jaguars: Urban Meyer

Jets: Robert Saleh - 3 years LB coach, 4 years DC in SF

Falcons: Arthur Smith - 3 years TE coach, 2 years OC

Chargers: Brandon Staley - 3 years LB coach, 1 year DC

Lions: Dan Campbell - 4 years TE coach, interim HC, then 5 years TE coach/assistant HC in NO (sounds like Duce?)

So which of these are you sure will be a winner?

And which is clearly better than the remaining potential candidates?

There are plenty of reasons to like or dislike McDaniels...personally, I’m willing to gamble on the potential upside.

It would be interesting if nothing else.

16 minutes ago, greend said:

Of course McClane is an idiot sooooooooooo?

Yes, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. He cited how he's burned bridges across the NFL with what he did to the Colts, combined with Belicheat not considering retirement anytime soon and Philly might be his only chance for awhile. I'm not against it, in fact I hope he does get hired. If there are any coaches left who can fix Wentz and not put up with his crap it's him. Wentz will probably hate him though. 

1 minute ago, Solomon said:

Yes, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. He cited how he's burned bridges across the NFL with what he did to the Colts, combined with Belicheat not considering retirement anytime soon and Philly might be his only chance for awhile. I'm not against it, in fact I hope he does get hired. If there are any coaches left who can fix Wentz and not put up with his crap it's him. Wentz will probably hate him though. 

Wentz doesn't have to "like" a coach!  Flip got results and the reports were that they didn't get along.

16 minutes ago, austinfan said:

That assumes an easily recognized pecking order ex ante. That is, the candidates you lose are better than the ones that are left.

It would be interesting if someone did a study of coaching hires and see whether early hires were more successful than later hires.

My suspicion is that it's pretty random.

If you are interviewing a bunch of candidates, and none blow you away, the fact that other teams hire them before your second interview probably doesn't matter since in that case they're all "meh."

Law firms hire lots of bright young associates from top schools, though my experience is that most law partners are mediocre intellects, every so often I came across one that was head and shoulders above the crowd, but they're rare. Probably the same with most coaching candidates, they all have some success on their resume or they wouldn't get interviewed, but most are probably similar in that they don't jump out at you as special.

My understanding is that the associates are just butt-monkeys until they prove otherwise.

26 minutes ago, austinfan said:

I think it's great that they interview everyone, teams that fixate on a "hot coach" go into the interview ready to buy anything he sells. How many "hot coaching candidates" fail? Most.

By casting a wide net, you get a lot of useful information about your team, potential assistant coaches, philosophical approach to schemes, etc.

And if you interview someone and you don't get useful information, well, that makes it easy to cross them off your list (you have no opinion on our roster? you have no idea who you'd hire as your OC and DC and assistant coaches? Get outta here!).

And every so often a surprise candidate comes into the interview and shows he's ready and loaded for bear. AR and his binder.

A well run football team most likely has 5 candidates they have their eyes on and know they have a chance at getting.

The Eagles look like they have no direction and they are just saying hey let's try this guy....oh Saleh went to NYJ, hmmm who can we dig up today.  Todd Bowles?  Really?  They know him, he's been here, he wasn't successful here or when he was a HC.  It looks even worse if they get special permission for 1 coach in the playoffs and they use it on him.  It's like getting drunk and checking in an old GF because you're desperate and you know why you broke up but hey let's swing again.

The sad fact is that the Eagles job is NOT attractive.  

Take out the salary, a big sports market and Lurie's top class facilities and what do the Eagles have a coach would want?  Young talent? nope, cap space? nope, a good GM? nope, steady QB situation? nope.

1 minute ago, bpac55 said:

A well run football team most likely has 5 candidates they have their eyes on and know they have a chance at getting.

The Eagles look like they have no direction and they are just saying hey let's try this guy....oh Saleh went to NYJ, hmmm who can we dig up today.  Todd Bowles?  Really?  They know him, he's been here, he wasn't successful here or when he was a HC.  It looks even worse if they get special permission for 1 coach in the playoffs and they use it on him.  It's like getting drunk and checking in an old GF because you're desperate and you know why you broke up but hey let's swing again.

The sad fact is that the Eagles job is NOT attractive.  

Take out the salary, a big sports market and Lurie's top class facilities and what do the Eagles have a coach would want?  Young talent? nope, cap space? nope, a good GM? nope, steady QB situation? nope.

You mean Daboll isn’t jumping at the opportunity to coach the 2017 almost MVP?

Weird.

12 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

He’s definitely qualified.  I’m not even against Patricia per se as a DC; he got good results in NE, and just because Slay couldn’t stand him as a HC doesn’t necessarily mean the two can’t exist together with him not the main guy.

Adam Gase as OC wouldn’t make me feel very good, though.

McDaniels, Patricia and Gase all together...I just vomited a little bit in my mouth.