24 minutes ago, justrelax said:

He isn't thinking that far ahead. This is Jimmy with an axe to grind. He gets like this sometimes, and now, with nothing to do and nowhere to be he's fixating. Jimmy certainly knows the team better than I do but this notion that the Eagles will just dump Dillard with only Mailata to play the position and nobody else on the roster who plays tackle is just nuts. I could see it if they can get their hands on Andrew Thomas and get a good package for Dillard but that ain't happening. He was decent at LT last year and hopeless at RT. Lots of guys can't switch sides; more can't than can. He has to get stronger and the only way he doesn't is if he's lazy. I haven't heard that said about him. Suggestions that he's immature or gets frustrated, maybe. But he's got the feet and the technique. He Beat reporters work on a 24-hour news cycle so the one thing they don't have is time and Jimmy, who has nothing new to say, is churning his bile here.

I just can't see it, but then, I thought Tommy Hearns would knock out Marvin  Hagler, so what do I know?

I like his feet and he gets good hand placement. I do worry that the lack of workouts hurts players like Dillard and Miller.   Both needed the offseason to. get stronger.

10 minutes ago, FTheCowboys said:

This I don't agree with. 1-3 years, maybe. But if you have to wait 5 years to see the brilliance of a draft pick, then it probably was not a good pick. Those 5 years count too. If you take a player who may not be quite as good long-term as Kinlaw, but still significantly adds to your team for 5 years while you still have Cox and Hargrave manning the middle, that's the better alternative to me.

I used 5 years as they look back at the totality of the pick of the contract and the guy is a pro bowl and the other guy wasn’t and just a contributor like Jordan Matthews was. 

even so change it to 3 years. Kid becomes a pro bowler and The guy you took isn’t near that level that was a better selection cause it helped instantly? Bad teams focus on the year ahead. Good teams focus on 2-3 years down the road as well as next year. 

 

8 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Bad GMs put themselves in a position where they have little choice. Perhaps we are going to find out more about Howie this weekend. 

No bad gms put themselves in a bad position then compound it by forcing a pick when a better prospect and player is available to them. If they don’t go WR round one i won’t cry if they got kinlaw. Frankly he’s better than any WR they could get besides lamb, jeudy and ruggs. 

Just now, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

No bad gms put themselves in a bad position then compound it by forcing a pick when a better prospect and player is available to them. If they don’t go WR round one i won’t cry if they got kinlaw. Frankly he’s better than any WR they could get besides lamb, jeudy and ruggs. 

I just think in terms of a balance I'd still go WR.

3 minutes ago, VaBeach_Eagle said:

I've been trying to get the Super Bowl thread archived as best as I can and just spotted this post that I made back then...

 

  Hide contents

 

Man, kind of harsh there... don't mess with me when the Eagles are in the Super Bowl, you might get hurt!! lol

We were all thinking the same thing. 

1 minute ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

I just think in terms of a balance I'd still go WR.

Ok and if they get a WR and he’s just ok. And kinlaw becomes a pro bowler and your board had him rated higher how would you feel? 

1 minute ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I used 5 years as they look back at the totality of the pick of the contract and the guy is a pro bowl and the other guy wasn’t and just a contributor like Jordan Matthews was. 

even so change it to 3 years. Kid becomes a pro bowler and The guy you took isn’t near that level that was a better selection cause it helped instantly? Bad teams focus on the year ahead. Good teams focus on 2-3 years down the road as well as next year. 

I agree with the premise, but you also have to find a balance. If Cox was 34 and Hargrave was 32 I'd 100% be on board. I just couldn't put yet another resource into one position when we'll have so many other needs in the next 3-4 years. The odds of DT being one of our 5 biggest needs at any point in 3 years is slim to none. DE is a significantly bigger concern, even CB with Slay being 29, likely only being here 2 years and still having no proven top level guys there. Safety as well. And that's just on the defense. Center, Guard, WR are also bigger.

If you want a "down the line" pick at 21, Ruiz is a much wiser investment I'd say.

Just now, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Ok and if they get a WR and he’s just ok. And kinlaw becomes a pro bowler and your board had him rated higher how would you feel? 

All part of the risk of the draft though? Needs must and that's the position Howie has put us in. DT is literally the lowest need on this team. 

7 hours ago, Original Sin said:

Like afan use to be Austin fan, vjeer not so much. Mattwill good guy, JR, was my civil war go to.

As far as grammar, punctuation etc, I'm here to discuss football not captolization ,periods  etc.

Some things never change...don't troll and we can go back to disagreeing on everything respectfully.  Hope all is well beast!!!!

18 minutes ago, justrelax said:

He really would. Incredible.

It would fit with my idea of running a 6 down lineman front with no LBs.  

58 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

Is Murray a 3 down LB? I thought the concern with him is that he didn't have to cover much in college.  

He didn’t, but he all the tools, instincts, athleticism, size, strength, smarts... I don’t see how he wouldn’t fit as a linebacker in any system. But I’m not sure  Shwartz would know a good linebacker if he was steamrolled by one. 

4 minutes ago, FTheCowboys said:

I agree with the premise, but you also have to find a balance. If Cox was 34 and Hargrave was 32 I'd 100% be on board. I just couldn't put yet another resource into one position when we'll have so many other needs in the next 3-4 years. The odds of DT being one of our 5 biggest needs at any point in 3 years is slim to none. DE is a significantly bigger concern, even CB with Slay being 29, likely only being here 2 years and still having no proven top level guys there. Safety as well. And that's just on the defense. Center, Guard, WR are also bigger.

If you want a "down the line" pick at 21, Ruiz is a much wiser investment I'd say.

It’s not as if cox is young. He’s 30 at years end. In 2 years going to be 31. He might decline. We’ve seen that out of other DT around the league when they have that much wear and tear. He was Still good but not nearly disruptive as previous seasons (Although playoff game he was killer). Now is that decline Or not having guys next to him to make life easier

i disagree in two years cox is still the same player he is now? Doubtful and you won’t need a DT? Also doubtful. Jackson is gone at year’s end. Cox is going to be 31 in two years and hargreaves will be entering the last year of his deal at 29. 
 

4 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

All part of the risk of the draft though? Needs must and that's the position Howie has put us in. DT is literally the lowest need on this team. 

I’d disagree. The lowest need on the team is frankly tight end. DT in 2 years from now is cox 31, hargreaves entering last year of his deal at 29. Thats it. 

You know why some are saying the eagles may surprise? Its gonna be Jonathan Taylor!

2 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I’d disagree. The lowest need on the team is frankly tight end. DT in 2 years from now is cox 31, hargreaves entering last year of his deal at 29. Thats it. 

No DT is. TE we have 2 number ones but one of those will be gone next year. 

Good news that we're in on Marquise Goodwin.  Would lessen the pressure to REACH for a WR if we bring him in.

Maybe a straight swap for Rasul Douglas?  Get it done Howie!

I am trying to get away from being thought of as annoying and negative, especially with the fresh new boards.

But I'll say one thing...I have no idea if these reports are total BS or not...but if they move Dillard during the draft, then just pack it in.  That's the last straw.  They'll have botched nearly every high pick besides Wentz.  They can't move forward with a need across the board at WR, 2 DE's for the future, and now an LT...especially when they've proven that they lack the aptitude to draft any of them.  If Dillard goes down as a miss, that's the tipping point.  There would be no where near enough talent to realistically talk SB...every single solid player on the team would be a vet on a pricey contract acquired via trade, FA, or inheritance.   They'd need a totally new room of guys doing the draft.  Enough is enough.  

Just now, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

No DT is. TE we have 2 number ones but one of those will be gone next year. 

why?

1 minute ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

No DT is. TE we have 2 number ones but one of those will be gone next year. 

Says who? Just saying they one won’t be here isn’t confirmation. They could sign ertz and then sign Goedert. Heck the eagles have said they want to get a deal done with ertz. And there’s been no rumors goedert would just leave or they wouldn’t sign both back. Been speculation 

i can speculate cox isn’t going to be the same player in 2 years at 31. And Jackson is gone at years end. And hargreaves would be entering his last year of a deal at 29. Seems there that’s an issue with an aging declining cox, hargreaves 29 and potentially leaving and Jackson gone. 

3 days, over 30,000 views on this thread alone. And many more to come before this night is over. 

Just now, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Says who? Just saying they one won’t be here isn’t confirmation. They could sign ertz and then sign Goedert. Heck the eagles have said they want to get a deal done with ertz. And there’s been no rumors goedert would just leave or they wouldn’t sign both back. Been speculation 

Because I can't see them signing both to long term deals that they will both be happy with. 

5 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

It’s not as if cox is young. He’s 30 at years end. In 2 years going to be 31. He might decline. We’ve seen that out of other DT around the league when they have that much wear and tear. He was Still good but not nearly disruptive as previous seasons (Although playoff game he was killer). Now is that decline Or not having guys next to him to make life easier

i disagree in two years cox is still the same player he is now? Doubtful and you won’t need a DT? Also doubtful. Jackson is gone at year’s end. Cox is going to be 31 in two years and hargreaves will be entering the last year of his deal at 29. 
 

I’d disagree. The lowest need on the team is frankly tight end. DT in 2 years from now is cox 31, hargreaves entering last year of his deal at 29. Thats it. 

I don’t see how in any scenario DT is a bigger need in 3 years than corner, WR, center, guard, safety, or DE

2 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

Good news that we're in on Marquise Goodwin.  Would lessen the pressure to REACH for a WR if we bring him in.

Maybe a straight swap for Rasul Douglas?  Get it done Howie!

Would it though?  I mean, really?  Is he good?  

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

I am trying to get away from being thought of as annoying and negative, especially with the fresh new boards.

But I'll say one thing...I have no idea if these reports are total BS or not...but if they move Dillard during the draft, then just pack it in.  That's the last straw.  They'll have botched nearly every high pick besides Wentz.  They can't move forward with a need across the board at WR, 2 DE's for the future, and now an LT.  If Dillard goes down as a miss, that's the tipping point.  There would be no where near enough talent to realistically talk SB... they'd need a totally new room of guys doing the draft.  Enough is enough.  

We are so lucky for the Jets taking Joe Douglas off our hands. 

If they are going to do it, the time is now while theyve let go of other vets like Peters and Jenkins. This is the re-tooling year. 

Just now, eagle45 said:

I am trying to get away from being thought of as annoying and negative, especially with the fresh new boards.

But I'll say one thing...I have no idea if these reports are total BS or not...but if they move Dillard during the draft, then just pack it in.  That's the last straw.  They'll have botched nearly every high pick besides Wentz.  They can't move forward with a need across the board at WR, 2 DE's for the future, and now an LT.  If Dillard goes down as a miss, that's the tipping point.  There would be no where near enough talent to realistically talk SB... they'd need a totally new room of guys doing the draft.  Enough is enough.  

Our drafting has been relatively poor if Dillard is a hit or not.  We got lucky with cheap veteran free agents to win our Super Bowl.  

What happens if the clock runs out and the pick isn’t in yet?