Spend the #6 pick on Pitts or bring Ertz back. I think you have to bring Ertz back in that scenario, right?

Unless you think Pitts can play WR that is

4 minutes ago, Thrive said:

Spend the #6 pick on Pitts or bring Ertz back. I think you have to bring Ertz back in that scenario, right?

Unless you think Pitts can play WR that is

Ertz won't be back. It's all about the $$$. We are not paying him what he wants. His fault for not taking the first deal the Eagles offered. In the end they will get what they can for him which looking at the past should be in the 2nd round range. 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

The reporters were a little caught off guard by how short the press conference was, but let’s be honest, this offseason is all about Wentz and how he’s handled. And the casual fan cares far more about that than his use of analytics. 

Bo Wulf was going to ask him about the youth of his staff but he wasn’t called on.

The Eagles having Lurie filibuster for 20 minutes and having Sirianni give a meandering monologue wasted a significant amount of time. 

Do you really think the casual fan is reading most of them?  The market for most of those reporters is fans that want depth in their reporting.   Want me to stay long enough that I might see the ads or keep my subscription, then cater to depth.   None of the questions about Wentz got more depth after the second one.  No wonder journalism is floundering.  

I do not see them taking Pitts UNLESS they feel he can play outside. They wont be drafting him to play TE if they do go with him. Goedert will be your TE. 

I can't see them passing on Chase and Smith for Pitts, that would be crazy.

If Stafford goes to the Niners gonna call Jimmy G back to the Pats.

22 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Do you really think the casual fan is reading most of them?  The market for most of those reporters is fans that want depth in their reporting.   Want me to stay long enough that I might see the ads or keep my subscription, then cater to depth.   None of the questions about Wentz got more depth after the second one.  No wonder journalism is floundering.  

 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

In journalism school, you’re taught that if the interview subject doesn’t answer your question well enough — whether it’s a non-answer or too vague — you ask it in different ways to get a more well-rounded and in-depth answer. You don’t let the subject off the hook after one question on the biggest topic of the press conference. 

I was a Communications major for a year and don’t recall that.   I do recall my first paragraph needed to answer who, what, when, where and how.  I was taught to make the interview conversational if possible because that tended to lend itself towards more honest answers. My profession and the profession of the line workers under my division involved investigation of events including interviewing parties involved and witnesses.  So does @NCiggles.  This is not a unique process limited to,reporters.  It was clear to anybody with eyes and ears that the Wentz questions weren’t going anywhere.  Heck, asking if, with all he had on his plate the next month, if he was going to defer home hunting to his wife or if the family was going to stay in Indy until things slow down for him, would have yielded more information. Analytics, what he seeks in a position coach etc. would have done two things, 1) made him more comfortable with the reporter, which could have paid more dividends in the long run and 2) gathered more information for more stories for the reporter.  

2 hours ago, Mike030270 said:

But you're constantly bashing Wentz. Constantly. So why do you dislike him so much then? I'm trying to understand it

I don't dislike him. I don't know him. I just don't think he's the long term answer at QB for this franchise. I don't like the way it's all been handled from our perspective and I don't like the fairly routine reports that come out. 

Ertz is washed.  His contract will be so overpaid. Trade him for 5th or a 4th if you can snub a team.  And F no to drafting a TE with our 1st pick.

1 minute ago, BigEFly said:

I was a Communications major for a year and don’t recall that.   I do recall my first paragraph needed to answer who, what, when, where and how.  I was taught to make the interview conversational if possible because that tended to lend itself towards more honest answers. My profession and the profession of the line workers under my division involved investigation of events including interviewing parties involved and witnesses.  So does @NCiggles.  This is not a unique process limited to,reporters.  It was clear to anybody with eyes and ears that the Wentz questions weren’t going anywhere.  Heck, asking if, with all he had on his plate the next month, if he was going to defer home hunting to his wife or if the family was going to stay in Indy until things slow down for him, would have yielded more information. Analytics, what he seeks in a position coach etc. would have done two things, 1) made him more comfortable with the reporter, which could have paid more dividends in the long run and 2) gathered more information for more stories for the reporter.  

That’s just poor writing, to be honest, but not surprising to teach first years that. 

2 hours ago, RLC said:

• Miles Sanders greatly improved as a rookie. He was running into linemen/fumbling to start the year and finished strong
• Corey Clement went from UDFA to pass-catching back in the playoffs. We don't win the SB without him
• Ajayi was able to integrate into offense at the trade deadline
• Turned Josh Adams into a functional rusher
• LeSean McCoy's best years were with Duce

I had lots of complaints about our coaching, but RBs weren't one of them

i agree to the piont our rbs were decent at doing their jobs, i laid out my issues with duce which go beyond can they line up ok, block and catch. His decision making during them gane planning and in game decisions are a major concern. Ultimately they are also very important as a coach.

 

36 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

"...shell of Carson Wentz."

He just had to throw that in there

30 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

Ertz won't be back. It's all about the $$$. We are not paying him what he wants. His fault for not taking the first deal the Eagles offered. In the end they will get what they can for him which looking at the past should be in the 2nd round range. 

I could see Howie somehow pushing someone's contract back and screwing up cap in future years to give Ertz a huge contract he doesn't deserve

10 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

Whats silly is asking him questions about players when he has been in the building 1 week and has yet to even get the players up to speed, no time to work with them. I get QB is the position everyone is so interested in. But give the guy a chance to have some OTAs, get the team up to speed with his system and get a chance to see what hes working with. 

Just now, Mike030270 said:

"...shell of Carson Wentz."

He just had to throw that in there

 

its how you can tell its click bait prior. lol. 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

 

With Detroit almost guaranteed to take a QB in the first round I think they could be a trade partner for the Eagles. Moving back to 7 should net you a 4th round pick and it won't impact the Eagles draft plans.

44 minutes ago, Thrive said:

Spend the #6 pick on Pitts or bring Ertz back. I think you have to bring Ertz back in that scenario, right?

Unless you think Pitts can play WR that is

Where did this false dilemma come from?

1 minute ago, metal said:

With Detroit almost guaranteed to take a QB in the first round I think they could be a trade partner for the Eagles. Moving back to 7 should net you a 4th round pick and it won't impact the Eagles draft plans.

i want more than a 4th to move back even one slot.   call me greedy

5 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

"...shell of Carson Wentz."

He just had to throw that in there

I can't listen to or read anything he puts out there... and "clicc" ?!   Really?   Grow up and use the language properly.

Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

Where did this false dilemma come from?

It’s obviously just fodder for discussion, like everything else we discuss around here. What happens if Pitts is the BPA at 6 and we can still bring back Ertz.

13 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

Just about anyone can post stories on BGN.  I don’t really consider Gowton a journalist. What news has he ever broken?  What in depth report like the NYT or WaPo has he ever written.  He isn’t even a string reporter.  Click bait is even mentioned in his tweet.  We are talking PFT level "journalism”.  

1 minute ago, BigEFly said:

Just about anyone can post stories on BGN.  I don’t really consider Gowton a journalist. What news has he ever broken?  What in depth report like the NYT or WaPo has he ever written.  He isn’t even a string reporter.  Click bait is even mentioned in his tweet.  We are talking PFT level "journalism”.  

The point is the interest level. Clearly. 

3 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

i want more than a 4th to move back even one slot.   call me greedy

That's possible. The draft order after the Eagles goes Detroit, Carolina and then Denver. All of those teams could be in play for a QB so you might be able to get a bidding war going and get more than just a 4th. But you also risk losing your preferred player if you go back more than one spot.

Just now, Thrive said:

It’s obviously just fodder for discussion, like everything else we discuss around here. What happens if Pitts is the BPA at 6 and we can still bring back Ertz.

One has nothing to do with the other.   You don't draft Pitts @ #6.   You move on from Ertz.  

If Pitts is so clearly the BPA on the board at #6, there will be offers for a trade back.  There are 6 better options than Pitts in this draft.

1 minute ago, metal said:

With Detroit almost guaranteed to take a QB in the first round I think they could be a trade partner for the Eagles. Moving back to 7 should net you a 4th round pick and it won't impact the Eagles draft plans.

Or you could find a team like Denver, Carolina or SF if they dont get Stafford and get a lot more. I wouldnt go past the top 12 range and we still could stay in our plan. 

Say Carolina might up that pick to a 3rd knowing the Lions would give you a 4th. make them bid against each other. However what makes them not just go to the Bengals one pick ahead?