1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

Amidst the HC hoopla, I wanted to take a step back to discuss the blueprint to success.  Forget the Eagles and what we do or don't need for a second.  Blank slate.  What's your ideal roster construction when you start from scratch.  

For me, it's all about 3 things.  

1.  QB.  The QB needs to project as a top 3 pure passer in the NFL.  I don't care about the mobility, doing more with less, making plays, or any of that other BS.  Hyper-elite pure passer.  

2.  OL.  Cumulatively, they need to be elite in pass protection.  That requires a major investment in high-end bookend OT's with perhaps unspectacular but solid 3 across the interior OL...no liabilities.  

3.  Three uncoverable pass targets.  Could be 3 WRs, could be 2 WRs and a TE.  3 guys that consistently separate and are open targets for your QB.

 

If you get those 3 things, all the other pieces will very, very easily fall into place.  Those 3 things guarantee an elite offense.  With an offense that good, one offseason is enough time to turn a neglected, awful defense into an average one.  

That would be my path and blueprint.  And the Eagles are 0-3 on those things right now.  So I don't see much point in looking to other positions in the draft.

1. It seems a major factor for the new HC is their plan for the QB position.  For now heading into this draft I do not see them drafting a QB.

2. Agree, and I think just about everyone knew the O line was a major issue this year.  They do have some young guys to build off, and guys returning from injury.  Unfortunately, they are stuck with contracts to Brooks and Johnson.  They're great talents when healthy but now to the point where you can't rely on them for every game.  And now that they have admitted to basically being in rebuild mode they are now just veteran place holders.  We also don't know if Kelce will retire or not.  I could see him not wanting to bother hanging around a rebuild and learning a new coach's system for the 3rd time.  In general, I believe a team should always bring in new O linemen to develop every season.  Whether that is with high draft picks, late round, UDFA, free agents, seeing who becomes available in camp/preseason from other teams, etc.  Just always be bringing in linemen because it's too important to have depth there.  There are some pieces now, but also question marks so I support moves to bring in quality O linemen to help the offense anywhere it comes from.  But I also don't think they have to make a lot of change here, like they threw picks at the WR position last year.  I'd be happy with drafting 1 or 2 guys.

3. I don't know if I agree or disagree with the 3 pass target figure, but of course an offense needs weapons.  I assume after trading Ertz and cutting Jeffrey, Jackson and JJAW the targets are Goedert, Reagor, Fulgham, Ward and Sanders.  I'm comfortable with Goedert and Sanders starting at TE and RB, and wouldn't even mind Richard Rogers backing up Goedert.  They need another RB to be the #2, and Scott should be a 3rd or 4th RB at best.  At WR, seems like they have a collection of JAGs, and drafting Chase at #6 would be a nice addition to the group.

But I want a balanced team, and this team has failed miserably in drafting defense and it shows.  I'd look at this draft not for this season, but who are pieces you want to build your team around.  If that's a DE, CB, LB, S in a high pick that is great too.  I like the idea of drafting WR Chase at #6, then the rest of the picks get the BPA at O line and any defensive position.  I also would like to see a couple player trades for picks to have some additional 3rd or 4th rounders.  Even if that's getting a team to give you future picks for the rebuild.

6 minutes ago, Nivraga said:

I would argue that you should value them regardless ... but yeah ... maybe that's the genesis of my bias. 

 

Seth Joyner, Byron Evans, William Thomas --- once upon a time ...

Different game, they couldn't play full time in today's NFL, well, maybe Thomas, but he was more quick than fast.

There's a reason the Eagles went for Taylor and Bradley, you can have two run stoppers in your base defense, but so much of the game is played against 4 WRs that you have to either go six DBs and 1 LB or 5 DBs and 2 LBs who are quasi-safeties. So there are very few 3 down LBs anymore.

1 minute ago, austinfan said:

Who among the hirees would have been our first choice?  Meyer? Saleh? Smith is the only one they interviewed and liked, and his resume certainly is no better than say Sirianni.

This wasn't like AR hitting the market because of personal tragedy but a long track record of success, this year is all a bunch of who knows?

Especially given the Dallas OL was almost as beat up as the Eagles OL, though he had much better skill talent.

Yeah the skill talent is a major help. That’s the thing that would concern me. However to his credit he actually began using more pollard when zeke struggled and when zeke got hurt pollard looked good. 

24 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

I didn't know NFL coaches can back out of contracts to go to college coaching jobs

3 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Who among the hirees would have been our first choice?  Meyer? Saleh? Smith is the only one they interviewed and liked, and his resume certainly is no better than say Sirianni.

This wasn't like AR hitting the market because of personal tragedy but a long track record of success, this year is all a bunch of who knows?

Especially given the Dallas OL was almost as beat up as the Eagles OL, though he had much better skill talent.

why does it have to be among the list of hirees? maybe it was Riley, or Day. Maybe it would be Daboll. Or maybe one of the hirees.  Bunch of options they may have missed on. 

25 minutes ago, Nivraga said:

The Eagles have trouble fielding 3 competent LBers let alone 4.

If you’re making the switch to a 3-4 it takes at least a year to make that transition because you’ve got to draft/acquire/develop personnel to fit that scheme.

Schwartz’s defense has been a 4-3 scheme with a wide-9 pass rush, designed to disrupt the pass game while shutting down the run out wide.  The offense will usually default to running straight through the middle — as it did successfully against the Washburn wide-9 — but the Eagles now allocate financial resources to have Cox, Hargrave (Jernigan), Malik Jackson DT through the middle, which does an excellent job of shutting down the interior run game.  Opponents have adjusted over the past 2-3 years by attacking the Eagles outside CBs, which is partly why the Eagles acquired Slay — to counteract that.

In a modern 3-4 defense the Eagles would need to employ a set of LB who can not only blitz the QB well, but perform in pass coverage against TE and RB.  The advantage of a 3-4 defense is to confuse the offense because they don’t know which 1 or 2 LB will pressure the QB, which ones will drop in coverage, etc.  To confuse the QB will lead to generating more turnovers.  Schwartz’s 4-3 generates fewer turnovers because it isn’t designed to fool anybody — just win with speed and strength
 

To adequately develop a 3-4 defense the Eagles need more hybrid guys, who can play either S or LB very well — a younger Malcolm Jenkins-type of player, but taller and an even longer wingspan.

5 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Different game, they couldn't play full time in today's NFL, well, maybe Thomas, but he was more quick than fast.

There's a reason the Eagles went for Taylor and Bradley, you can have two run stoppers in your base defense, but so much of the game is played against 4 WRs that you have to either go six DBs and 1 LB or 5 DBs and 2 LBs who are quasi-safeties. So there are very few 3 down LBs anymore.

I wasn't suggesting that we clone those 3 - I was simply pointing out "once upon a time" the Eagles actually fielded All Pro quality LBers - like when who is the last Eagle LBer to get a pro bowl nod - let alone all pro - Trotter?  That's really sad.

2 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

If you’re making the switch to a 3-4 it takes at least a year to make that transition because you’ve got to draft/acquire/develop personnel to fit that scheme.

Schwartz’s defense has been a 4-3 scheme with a wide-9 pass rush, designed to disrupt the pass game while shutting down the run out wide.  The offense will usually default to running straight through the middle — as it did successfully against the Washburn wide-9 — but the Eagles now allocate financial resources to have Cox, Hargrave (Jernigan), Malik Jackson DT through the middle, which does an excellent job of shutting down the interior run game.  Opponents have adjusted over the past 2-3 years by attacking the Eagles outside CBs, which is partly why the Eagles acquired Slay — to counteract that.

In a modern 3-4 defense the Eagles would need to employ a set of LB who can not only blitz the QB well, but perform in pass coverage against TE and RB.  The advantage of a 3-4 defense is to confuse the offense because they don’t know which 1 or 2 LB will pressure the QB, which ones will drop in coverage, etc.  To confuse the QB will lead to generating more turnovers.  Schwartz’s 4-3 generates fewer turnovers because it isn’t designed to fool anybody — just win with speed and strength
 

To adequately develop a 3-4 defense the Eagles need more hybrid guys, who can play either S or LB very well — a younger Malcolm Jenkins-type of player, but taller and an even longer wingspan.

Hell of a lot of needs. And then are the DT they have playing out of position again and can Cox handle a 3-4 again at his age?

If we hire Sirianni, we have to sign DiNucci

Reality check, it's great to have a Peyton, Brady or Rodgers, they come along once a decade or so. Teams win SBs with Flacco, Foles, etc. That's what you have to plan for, and Wentz and Hurts have the potential to be that good. That is, good enough to win with a good team.

Three targets that can get open consistently? One would be nice, but it depends what you mean. Ward gets consistently open on 3rd down but not deep. Three guys who get open quickly 20 yards downfield against a good defense? Dream on. Rather, more likely are guys who can get open in the context of their roles and the defenses they'll face, Goedert as a blocking TE on underneath routes, for example. A deep threat, a good possession receiver, a tinker toy, and a dangerous H-back. We have some guys with this potential but need more.

We have a solid OL going into next year, even without Kelce, Driscoll at LG and backing up RT, Seumalo at LG/C, Herbig C/RG, Dillard, Mailata at OT. Bring back Brooks and Lane b/c if healthy they'll take pressure off the young guys and protect your QB. Then draft an OL in the 2nd to 4th rounds each of the next three years and build young depth, and later rd/UDFA fliers.

Defense is where we need the most help, and I'd use a combination of a few high picks for impact, and lot's of late round picks for depth and STs.

2023 is my target date, cap room will be cleared, the QB situation resolved, and 6 picks in the top 15 and the top 45 will be a nice core to a new contender.

A one year turn around would be a mirage that would likely regress the following season, we have a ring, just making the playoffs with a 9-7 record should not suffice.

 

5 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

If we hire Sirianni, we have to sign DiNucci

I think it would also be mandatory if we did sign dinucci to say it with an Italian accent 

6 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

why does it have to be among the list of hirees? maybe it was Riley, or Day. Maybe it would be Daboll. Or maybe one of the hirees.  Bunch of options they may have missed on. 

Riley, let me vomit, college coaches with no NFL experience have a horrid track record. And I've seen the Oklahoma offense every year, nothing special to me.

Day? Why? Daboll, what does he have over the other guys they interviewed?

I seriously doubt ANYONE hired was someone they thought was a must have, merely someone they would have liked to interview.

An OC with one or two good seasons is not exactly a sure thing as a HC. Say who was the OC under Reid when McNabb made his big jump in 2001 and 2002.

3 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Riley, let me vomit, college coaches with no NFL experience have a horrid track record. And I've seen the Oklahoma offense every year, nothing special to me.

Day? Why? Daboll, what does he have over the other guys they interviewed?

I seriously doubt ANYONE hired was someone they thought was a must have, merely someone they would have liked to interview.

An OC with one or two good seasons is not exactly a sure thing as a HC. Say who was the OC under Reid when McNabb made his big jump in 2001 and 2002.

Ill make it easier for you out of all that content= No coach is a sure thing........................................We got it. 

1 minute ago, austinfan said:

Riley, let me vomit, college coaches with no NFL experience have a horrid track record. And I've seen the Oklahoma offense every year, nothing special to me.

Day? Why? Daboll, what does he have over the other guys they interviewed?

I seriously doubt ANYONE hired was someone they thought was a must have, merely someone they would have liked to interview.

An OC with one or two good seasons is not exactly a sure thing as a HC. Say who was the OC under Reid when McNabb made his big jump in 2001 and 2002.

Theres probably a reason, or many reasons why the media knows these names will be hot prospects in the next coaching cycle and next thing you know, they get scooped up by the teams. 

I dont know if you think the eagles are that much smarter than everyone else, or what. But the probability is, with as many HC positions as have been filled by now, we missed on our guy. Most likely the eagles knew the same thing the other teams did that made those guys this years top prospects. 

If the eagles didnt like the potential Pederson replacements, then theyd likely not have fired him this year. 

Im not mad about it. But its likely just the reality of the situation we find ourselves in. 

13 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

If we hire Sirianni, we have to sign DiNucci

instead of ice cream after team meetings, its gonna be cannoli. Massive upgrade. 

1 minute ago, HazletonEagle said:

instead of ice cream after team meetings, its gonna be cannoli. Massive upgrade. 

 

these coaches wont be allowed with the team on sundays. their moms force them to attend Sunday dinner with the rest of the family.

2 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Riley, let me vomit, college coaches with no NFL experience have a horrid track record. And I've seen the Oklahoma offense every year, nothing special to me.

Day? Why? Daboll, what does he have over the other guys they interviewed?

I seriously doubt ANYONE hired was someone they thought was a must have, merely someone they would have liked to interview.

An OC with one or two good seasons is not exactly a sure thing as a HC. Say who was the OC under Reid when McNabb made his big jump in 2001 and 2002.

I knew Rod Dowhower was Reids first OC but couldn't remember when he left ... looked that up ... 2001 - Brad Childress took over in 2002 but he was also the QB coach in 2000, 2001.

 

I guess you're pointing out that he didn't do so well as HC in Minnesota. I think that illustrates how important getting the QB position right is - you don't need Manning or Brady, Brees or Rodgers. You don't need top 5 but I think you need top 15. Foles is a unicorn - from the knee doink forward in 2017. Dilfer won but he had a dominate run game and a lock down defense. The Eagles would have won similarly in '91 had McMann stayed healthy after Randall went down in game 1. 

23 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

Ill make it easier for you out of all that content= No coach is a sure thing........................................We got it. 

The thing with daboll is we don’t know what he’s going to be. He has his own set of flaws that I can go into. However if you’re asking me who I rather have him or Josh McDaniels I am taking daboll.

For the simple reason Josh McDaniels away from the patriots for whatever excuse you want to give him or say he’s grown up has not had one season of the type success like daboll has had with Allen and the bills. Additionally Tom Brady has shown without Josh McDaniels to be awesome still. Tom Brady without Josh McDaniels in DVOA since 2006 has finished first, first and fourth.

Both of them were with New England and had success with New England. Mcdaniels a higher roll but daboll showed he could do the same thing with bama and now bills. However taking Josh Allen who was considered inaccurate coming out of college and most people on this blog and on the Eagles message board thought would be a bust. I know because I brought up during that draft I would take Josh Allen over any of the other quarterbacks besides Sam Darnold. And people crucified me for that take. (I still think Sam Darnold is going to be at least solid if he goes to a team that has a good system like Kyle Shanahan and the Niners ).

So he’s been able to get a inaccurate quarterback from college and in three years able to get him to 70% completion in a league and MVP. Furthermore he was able to incorporate Stefon Diggs into an offense when he didn’t even have an off-season of activities to do it and Stefon Diggs led the entire NFL in receiving yards. 

Now the issue is it’s not all on daboll. Allen put in the work with other coaches and Ken Dorsey might be a really good quarterback coach. That’s the risk you take with daboll. But I can still say he has that offense second in the league and scoring its second league in total yards after three years of working with a quarterback that needed a lot of development on his accuracy and passing

I’ll be honest I know nothing about sirianni. So I’m guessing that he already better than McDaniels. 

22 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

why does it have to be among the list of hirees? maybe it was Riley, or Day. Maybe it would be Daboll. Or maybe one of the hirees.  Bunch of options they may have missed on. 

Daboll may still be in play. Just need to wait until Bills win it all or are eliminated

18 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

Hell of a lot of needs. And then are the DT they have playing out of position again and can Cox handle a 3-4 again at his age?

He seems to be declining

I think the Eagles are smarter because there was no "sure thing" among this year's coaching candidates. When there is no sure thing, case a wide net and hope to get lucky, i.e., have someone come to the interview like AR and show they're heads and shoulders above everyone else. Other than Smith, the other guys who were hired barely interviewed and were basically snatched up on a hope and a prayer, Campbell? Meyer? Really?  Saleh and Smith were probably the most impressive. Staley is a shot in the dark.

So the idea that there was this small group of "real" candidates that the Eagles missed out on by taking their time is contradicted by the fact that the people they've interviewed have similar credentials. Which hot OC should we go for, the one under Reich or the one under McDermott or the one under Reid or the one under Vrabel. Sure an OC under a defensive oriented HC probably has more hands on control of the offense, but also hasn't been mentored by a top offensive mind.

Point is Eagle fans are so primed to see everything in a negative light they ignore that teams have jumped at dubious candidates, and our only competition left is Houston, which is a pit. So we have the opportunity not only to gather a lot of information, but to make a careful decision in plenty of time to put a staff together but not so hasty that you're crossing your fingers you got the right guy.

The only guy I think the Eagles might have wanted was Smith, and frankly we can't compete with the Chargers (and not b/c of Lowie) because they've mostly sucked for a while and have a lot of young talent, starting at QB. 6 guys on defense, 6 guys on offense all drafted in the last 5 years, along with veterans like Keenan Allen and LT Beluga. Herbert #6, Bosa #3, Williams #7, it helps to lose.

5 minutes ago, austinfan said:

I think the Eagles are smarter because there was no "sure thing" among this year's coaching candidates. When there is no sure thing, case a wide net and hope to get lucky, i.e., have someone come to the interview like AR and show they're heads and shoulders above everyone else. Other than Smith, the other guys who were hired barely interviewed and were basically snatched up on a hope and a prayer, Campbell? Meyer? Really?  Saleh and Smith were probably the most impressive. Staley is a shot in the dark.

So the idea that there was this small group of "real" candidates that the Eagles missed out on by taking their time is contradicted by the fact that the people they've interviewed have similar credentials. Which hot OC should we go for, the one under Reich or the one under McDermott or the one under Reid or the one under Vrabel. Sure an OC under a defensive oriented HC probably has more hands on control of the offense, but also hasn't been mentored by a top offensive mind.

Point is Eagle fans are so primed to see everything in a negative light they ignore that teams have jumped at dubious candidates, and our only competition left is Houston, which is a pit. So we have the opportunity not only to gather a lot of information, but to make a careful decision in plenty of time to put a staff together but not so hasty that you're crossing your fingers you got the right guy.

The only guy I think the Eagles might have wanted was Smith, and frankly we can't compete with the Chargers (and not b/c of Lowie) because they've mostly sucked for a while and have a lot of young talent, starting at QB. 6 guys on defense, 6 guys on offense all drafted in the last 5 years, along with veterans like Keenan Allen and LT Beluga. Herbert #6, Bosa #3, Williams #7, it helps to lose.

Smith didn’t go to the chargers. He went to atlanta. Unless you are talking about smith and just chargers in general 

5 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Daboll may still be in play. Just need to wait until Bills win it all or are eliminated

He seems to be declining

Yeah, so moving him back to 3-4 from the Chip days doesn't seem smart to me. I guess they can gut the team, but still.

4 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Daboll may still be in play. Just need to wait until Bills win it all or are eliminated

He seems to be declining

I dont think the door is completely closed on Lincoln Riley either. Not saying he is chip kelly level desirable (back when we hired him) but just because of the way that went down, I dont think anyone is out until theyre hired by another team, or we hire someone else. 

If Jeff and Howie settle on a guy, they dont make saying no easy.