The unstated assumption in the Hurts discussion is that he can play at the NFL level. It's all conjecture at this point. 

The advantage of a veteran backup is that they have established that they can play in the NFL and you have a good idea of what you are getting.

The fact that we had to rely on McCown in the playoffs is more an indictment of Doug's and Howie's mismanagement of the position than it is an indictment of veteran backups in general.

16 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Let me preface this by saying I 100% do NOT want this to happen.  For the sake of trying to make the most sense of the Jalen Hurts pick I had given this some thought too. 

If we don't reach and/or win the Super Bowl by 2023 you have to wonder do they move on from Carson (32) in 2024 and hand over to Hurts on a new 2nd contract (potentially half of what Carson costs).  Carson's dead cap in 2024 is only $6 million so he is tradeable.  Could the return on Wentz be more than the return on Hurts? 

Just food for thought and debate to have now that we are back in a dead period with no rookie camps, mini camps or anything.

AGAIN, I DO NOT WANT THIS TO HAPPEN.  

 

If it played a part in the reasoning behind the pick, I think it was a minor one. I thought it was more of not wanting to be left flat-footed if Carson's injuries continue. Best case scenario is the unlikely one where Wentz plays the next 3 years injury free and Hurts learns the intricacies of the position while being a player you have for a few packages. The FO imho wanted to be prepared for the worst case, one in which Wentz keeps on getting hurt, and they don't have the cap allotment they had in the past for backup QBs. 

29 minutes ago, Karma_is_a_guy said:

Thinking about the most charitable way to look at drafting Hurts. I don't buy the future draft capital argument, because even a 1st round pick in 2021 or 2022 would essentially be a wash with a current #53 pick. It's possible he could be used like Taysom Hill in 1-4 plays every game. That, too, seems like an under use for someone who was arguably one of the top 5 QBs in this year's draft. Hurts deserves a shot at being a starter somewhere. One thing the Eagles do is overspend for the backup QB position, and given there is a 50/50 chance that QB will start at least one game, that might be a position worth spending on. If drafting Hurts frees up cap room next year and the following year, that could prove to be worth spending a second round pick for. Or maybe the Eagles are hedging their bets that Wentz won't be able to remain healthy. Or maybe they saw that a NFC East rival was fixing to snap him up, and it was a blocking move. So this could be seen as a cost-saving move looking ahead to the next two years when the Eagles may be facing cap strain.

If thats the angle though wouldnt it be better to wait for the fourth round and get a guy even cheaper?

24 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Younger than Carson. So is Mariota. Something to ponder with both. 

And they both kinda suck. Kinda like Christian Ponder.

9 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Every detail of that is hilarious.

It is.

What is it with this FO and their asinine, hyperbolic pronouncements?

Gold Standard

The New Normal

QB Factory

Too much hubris for my tastes.

5 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

The unstated assumption in the Hurts discussion is that he the player we could have taken instead can play at the NFL level. It's all conjecture at this point. 

The advantage of a veteran backup is that they have established that they can play in the NFL and you have a good idea of what you are getting.

The fact that we had to rely on McCown in the playoffs is more an indictment of Doug's and Howie's mismanagement of the position than it is an indictment of veteran backups in general.

FYP

1 minute ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

FYP

If you used a veteran, then that assumption disappears.

Eh, never mind. I was trying to do three things at once

5 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

If thats the angle though wouldnt it be better to wait for the fourth round and get a guy even cheaper?

By that rationale why not wait until the seventh round, or udfa?

 

1 minute ago, Desertbirds said:

It is.

What is it with this FO and their asinine, hyperbolic pronouncements?

Gold Standard

The New Normal

QB Factory

Too much hubris for my tastes.

We've made the playoff both years after Doug promised playoff football.

25 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Let me preface this by saying I 100% do NOT want this to happen.  For the sake of trying to make the most sense of the Jalen Hurts pick I had given this some thought too. 

If we don't reach and/or win the Super Bowl by 2023 you have to wonder do they move on from Carson (32) in 2024 and hand over to Hurts on a new 2nd contract (potentially half of what Carson costs).  Carson's dead cap in 2024 is only $6 million so he is tradeable.  Could the return on Wentz be more than the return on Hurts? 

Just food for thought and debate to have now that we are back in a dead period with no rookie camps, mini camps or anything.

AGAIN, I DO NOT WANT THIS TO HAPPEN.  

 

I thought about this yesterday in the hours leading up to the 3rd day.  Then I decided it was a waste of time, and I decided to just let it play out.  No sense worrying about it.  We'll find out what the plan is as it unfolds.  We can get all worked up and be miserable and tie ourselves in knots... but in this case, its just not worth it.  And the more we delve into it, the more the hardliners just get infuriated and make this place miserable.  

Just now, Desertbirds said:

If you used a veteran, then that assumption disappears.

I'm talking about Mims, Chinn, etc.

9 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

The unstated assumption in the Hurts discussion is that he can play at the NFL level. It's all conjecture at this point. 

The advantage of a veteran backup is that they have established that they can play in the NFL and you have a good idea of what you are getting.

The fact that we had to rely on McCown in the playoffs is more an indictment of Doug's and Howie's mismanagement of the position than it is an indictment of veteran backups in general.

How so?  What other veteran was available that they should have grabbed that would have qualified as not mismanagement for you? Bridegwater, Tannehill and....???  Maybe Tyrod Taylor?

3 minutes ago, obedt said:

If it played a part in the reasoning behind the pick, I think it was a minor one. I thought it was more of not wanting to be left flat-footed if Carson's injuries continue. Best case scenario is the unlikely one where Wentz plays the next 3 years injury free and Hurts learns the intricacies of the position while being a player you have for a few packages. The FO imho wanted to be prepared for the worst case, one in which Wentz keeps on getting hurt, and they don't have the cap allotment they had in the past for backup QBs. 

How many backup veteran QBs would you trust?

The QBs who consistently give Schwartz fits are the young mobile guys on which they lack a "book."

Flacco is easy to defend, he can't move, he's not a Brees or Brady throwing quick darts. In the playoffs, you face top defenses, if you don't have a top QB, you need to scheme your way around (the way Doug did with Foles), a guy like Hurts gives you more options to scheme for a game or two.

The thing with Hurts over some of the 3rd tier veterans is he's careful with the football, doesn't throw a lot of interceptions and will pull the ball down and run if there's nothing there. That might not work over the long haul as a starter, but exactly what you want in a young backup QB while he refines his skills and vision.

People are also overvaluing a #53 pick, it's not a top 40 pick where the top value resides, it's a good pick, but for every hit there's an ugly miss.

It was a shot at a guy who could have been a solid starter, but it wasn't a top 20 pick where you have a 80% or so shot at getting a starter and maybe a star.

 

Just now, Connecticut Eagle said:

I'm talking about Mims, Chinn, etc.

Yes, see above.

4 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

We've made the playoff both years after Doug promised playoff football.

Oh come on. You know he was talking about Super Bowls.

3 minutes ago, justrelax said:

By that rationale why not wait until the seventh round, or udfa?

 

Exactly

1 minute ago, Desertbirds said:

Oh come on. You know he was talking about Suer Bowls.

The last two seasons we had a legitimate shot of going deep into the playoffs - that's really all you can ask - because crap happens.

2 minutes ago, austinfan said:

How many backup veteran QBs would you trust?

The QBs who consistently give Schwartz fits are the young mobile guys on which they lack a "book."

Flacco is easy to defend, he can't move, he's not a Brees or Brady throwing quick darts. In the playoffs, you face top defenses, if you don't have a top QB, you need to scheme your way around (the way Doug did with Foles), a guy like Hurts gives you more options to scheme for a game or two.

The thing with Hurts over some of the 3rd tier veterans is he's careful with the football, doesn't throw a lot of interceptions and will pull the ball down and run if there's nothing there. That might not work over the long haul as a starter, but exactly what you want in a young backup QB while he refines his skills and vision.

People are also overvaluing a #53 pick, it's not a top 40 pick where the top value resides, it's a good pick, but for every hit there's an ugly miss.

It was a shot at a guy who could have been a solid starter, but it wasn't a top 20 pick where you have a 80% or so shot at getting a starter and maybe a star.

I'll answer the question with a question - in which position would you spend a 2nd round pick with the expectation that the player selected won't develop into a starter? 

 

The way my brain is wired, there is none. I'm drafting in the 2nd round, I'm expecting the player I pick to be someone I can develop to start games in the NFL.

Just now, austinfan said:

The last two seasons we had a legitimate shot of going deep into the playoffs - that's really all you can ask - because crap happens.

Yes, crap happens. That's why you don't make such asinine statements.

1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

I think Watkins will be released and we keep our fingers crossed he makes it to the PS.

His entire college experience was getting the ball dumped to him underneath and beating the defense in a foot race to the end zone.  I'm glad they drafted him and I'm excited to see our coaches get their hands on him, but I don't think he's going to be roster-able by September.  

Pretty accurate.  He is up against Marcus Green for a PS slot.   He is straight line fast but showed no real quickness in cuts and is very raw in his route tree.  Body catcher too.  Only way I see either him or Green making the team is an injury.  

Gotta get a true number two RB. Really disappointed they couldn’t land Breida. He would have been a perfect compliment to Sanders. Holyfield was a scrap heap pick up that couldn’t get on the field even with a injured Howard. An UDFA in Warren doesn’t move the needle much, if at all. I looked into him and he does nothing for me personally. 

2 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

Oh come on. You know he was talking about Suer Bowls.

Fair.  But we haven't fallen off the face of the earth like Atlanta and LAR.

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

By every account I read on Wallace, he gets worse the farther away he gets from the LOS. 

I tend to think that is overstated.  Our use of the high safety is mainly a read and react and he does well at that. 

27 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

My favorite McNabb game.