2 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Young had played 4 professional seasons.  That move would be more like the Eagles signing Winston than drafting Hurts.  Had we signed Winston we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I honestly believe the Eagles draft Hurts even if Wentz never got Hurt. Either way it is what it is. 

Just now, EaglePhan1986 said:

I honestly believe the Eagles draft Hurts even if Wentz never got Hurt. Either way it is what it is. 

Probably so.  I think they have a philosophy that includes having two capable top QBs on the roster with one being the clear #1 and the other an expensive insurance policy that they believe they can get value out of one way or the other over time.

I would much rather have had another piece to the puzzle but I don't think there is going to be a real problem in the locker room.

13 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

I honestly believe the Eagles draft Hurts even if Wentz never got Hurt. Either way it is what it is. 

I don't know, I still think if Thorson wasn't a complete and utter failure last season and showed some competency as a backup that they don't draft Hurts. They're obviously not impressed with Sudfeld and he only has this year left on his deal. I think this came down to wanting to reach on a guy that they could ingratiate in the system for the next three years or so. You can't do that with a guy like Jameis or Cam because they have ambitions to start somewhere again. They can be patient with Hurts because he's not going anywhere. 

If Wentz ends up pulling a Luck and calling it quits, you have your next QB. If not, you can flip Hurts for a first or second round pick at best. The more I think about this though the more it feels like the front office hedging against a Luck scenario with Wentz. It doesn't justify the pick, but I think that played a significant role in it. 

2 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Probably so.  I think they have a philosophy that includes having two capable top QBs on the roster with one being the clear #1 and the other an expensive insurance policy that they believe they can get value out of one way or the other over time.

I would much rather have had another piece to the puzzle but I don't think there is going to be a real problem in the locker room.

Nope and at the point in the draft is there really a player that helps out right away in a significant way? The reports were they were interested in a safety (Chin I think?) and JK Dobbins. The safety is probably a backup and plays mainly special teams while Dobbins probably only gets 8 carries if they’re winning. They probably figure they can find almost equal value later in the draft, in a vet FA, or even rookie UDFA. 

2 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

Joe Montana was 32 or 33 and had several nagging injuries. Young already played 2? seasons and was deemed a bust. It’s kind of a similar situation but not really. Unless of course CW has had meetings with the front office about potential retirement if he kept getting hurt. 

I'm not arguing it is a perfect comp, but it does have some similarities.

Walsh invested a 2nd round pick in a QB, Eagles did same

Montana had several nagging injuries, doesn't Wentz have an injury history?

Young was seen as raw player (only played one full NFL season, he was very unrefined), Hurts is a bit of a raw talent.

injuries and stagnation of play had Walsh worried about Montana, Carson is young and not fully developed but he sure does look like he has plateaued (although i think receiver play has played a big role)? When Steve came in Montana had some of his best seasons, why cant that happen with Carson,

I am simply stating that Howie brought Hurts in here to serve a purpose: 2 purposes that make sense to me are to serve as an insurance policy/potential long term replacement or trade option, and to push Carson's development.

 

4 hours ago, garingovt2000 said:

Who's draft did you guys like the best?

Dallas, Minnesota, Denver

3 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

Dallas, Minnesota, Denver

of those 3 i like Dallas' the best. 

15 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

Dallas, Minnesota, Denver

I’d add i think the jets did good on value of the picks where they were drafting. And i thought the ravens also had a very good draft in terms of value they got where they were picking in Queen, then dobbins and then Duvernay at 92 

5 hours ago, garingovt2000 said:

Who's draft did you guys like the best?

In a vacuum I really like Jacksonvilles draft, but I dont like some of the pics for that specific team.

2 hours ago, PrinceKelby said:

Also, have to include the myriad of guys who haven't developed. Suds, Thorson, etc.

Those guys are floor sweepings compared to Hurts. Whether he works out or not, Howie noticed that in 14 of the last 15 years our starting QB has missed time, sometimes a lot of it. I may be foolish but I think I detect a pattern.

1 hour ago, Infam said:

Actually, it came from Lurie.

"The goal is to have two QBs in the top 10"

This is alarming if true.  Do you have a source for this?  

25 minutes ago, QBhunter58 said:

of those 3 i like Dallas' the best. 

I hate every single player the Cowboys drafted. I hope y'all do too.

2 hours ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

Random prediction... 

I think the end of the Rodgers era in Green Bay ends sooner rather than later. Would not be shocked if it ends this offseason. I think if he plays this year and they noticeably regress, he’s definitely done. 
 

The best fit for him, imo, would be San Francisco. It’d make sense. Jimmy G, a 1st, and another mid-round pick get it done? 

Yeah don’t seee SF giving up jimmy g, first for Rodgers if he’s on the decline like you said after this year if they regress.

the teams i think make more sense are broncos if that’s a BIG if Lock falters this year (elway needs to win soon and hes shown to go after older QBs— Flacco and Manning), Raiders (carr Easy to get out of contract and mariota would also have o not be good if he comes in for carr this year), redskins (Snyder factor and would require Haskins being a bust this year and rivera wants to move on). I think colts depending on rivers completely looks like crap. have the time to develop a QB (Eason was a 4th i think he’s a development guy until he’s ready so Rodgers after rivers would make some sense) so Rodgers could play a year Maybe two til Eason is there 

7 minutes ago, hputenis said:

This is alarming if true.  Do you have a source for this?  

Posted it in the Hurts thread.

Quote

Listen: I can look you, I can look him, I can look anybody in the Eye - hopefully face to face at some point in time soon - and tell you: We love Carson Wentz. And we've shown it with our actions. We've showed it when we traded everything to go and get him. We've showed it when we paid him with that contract. And it's not like we're trying to get out of that contract. We are committed to that, but we are trying to build a football team that has incredible depth, that we have that value of that backup Quarterback position and Jeffrey [Lurie] said: We want to have two of the top 10 Quarterbacks of the league. Like: That's our goal. That's what we are trying to do. And we want to continue to do that, because we've had so many experiences like this. And Mike, you know, I and maybe I've said this and you've heard it but I've talked about 2002 and you and I, 2003 we've put in a championship game, Donovan McNabb got knocked out we've played with a backup Quarterback. We come back in 2005 we had a backup Quarterback who went 5-11, the next year we had Jeff Garcia as backup we won the division with. 2010 Mike Vick starts as a backup we won the division. 2013 Nick Foles came in as a backup Quarterback and won the division. And then, you know, our last three years. So when we look at what makes the difference in terms of winning and losing and how valuable this position is, you know, it seemed to us when we went back and fourth about the logic of this - and obviously the evaluation of the player and what he could add to our team: That it made sense.

Yes, the [Lurie] is added from me. But whom else would he be talking about?

1 hour ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Nah.  Egregious is selecting Steve Walsh the same year you have drafted Troy Aikman.   That's not what happened here.  This could be a mistake, this could send the wrong message, but this could work out... somehow.  The Aikman/Walsh thing couldn't and never did, but everyone forgot about it because of how good the rest turned out for the Cowboys, specifically the Walker trade that more than made up for it.

I disagree with this.  I don't even remember this, but if neither of these guys had proven themselves at the NFL level at this point, how is it egregious?  What if Aikman turned out to be Clay Thorson?  Carson has proven himself as elite.  He's 27 and has been surrounded with speed and weapons 1 time.  The only question any intelligent fan has with him is his durability, and last summer, the Eagles put that to bed by showing him the money.  I still view this pick as a big FU to Carson, whether they know they did it or not.  

I would say there is a 0% chance Hurts could get any of Howie, Doug, or Weidel fired. 

That pick 100% indicates the 3 gentlemen are extremely comfy in the seats they were sitting in on draft night. 

In fact, if Reagor busts, thats a far bigger deal. Hes known to not care about blocking, to take plays off, and have concentration drops. If his attitude does not improve, hes going to be a guy always ending up in the dog house. The kind of guy who busts despite immense talent. They know these things about him. And they drafted him anyway. In the 1st round.

Reagor is far more likely to get them in trouble than Hurts ever is. A 2nd round pick not panning out is fairly common. If it happens every year then thats a problem. Hurts in a vacuum will never be an issue for these front office guys.

Now lets say he does bust. But Wallace is a starter, one of hightower or Watkins hits, Reagor is at least a solid starter. At least one of those LBs becomes a years long solid special teams guy. That draft class is actually excellent no matter if Hurts makes it or not. 

If Dillard busts, that may be the biggest deal of all, because it could get their franchise QB killed in the process.

The Eagles brought in Harrell for an interview.  It is well known that the Leach school calls for simpler calls at the LOS.  The last two years when Wntz went down, they went back the more of the RPO.  The drafted an RPO QB as the back up QB.  Down the stretch, they simplified the offense some to accommodate the young WRs.   It was obvious to anybody that JJAW was confused at times in his route running. Probably trying to decipher which route had been called. Carson is best moving and they started calling that and then brought in a offensive advisor that did that under AR and a motion guy in Scangarello.  
All this plus a truncated offseason suggests some move away from the long WCO calls. 

1 minute ago, FTheCowboys said:

If Dillard busts, that may be the biggest deal of all, because it could get their franchise QB killed in the process.

Good we got a backup now.. 

I like the Reagor/Hightower/Watkins picks.  But if Howie goes 0/3 on them and Hurts meanders as a backup, I don't see how he'd have a leg left to stand on.

For me, Dillard is the tipping point.  If he's our starting LT, 2019 is a nice draft and we all look to the 2020 draft with great optimism.  

If Dillard is a bust and they have to unearth Jason Peters to start at LT this year, combined with the fact that most in the media panned his draft this year, I'm not sure how many busts Howie needs to draft and how many years he needs to go without drafting anything resembling an impact player (besides Wentz, who was a franchise-wide decision) before everyone just acknowledges that the man cannot draft.

Hopefully Dillard starts, Reagor has an early impact, and this all just blows over.  

But it's time for some of Howie's draft picks to actually contribute in the starting lineup.

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

It all points to Lurie.  If Doug and Howie are enabled to make these kind of personnel decisions (Doug has to have a hand in the top two picks) then Lurie has enabled them enough to make them feel comfy, as you say.  Lurie is also the reason if/why/when Peters comes back.   If this team becomes a consistent 8-8, 9-7 team.  It's Lurie's fault.  

 

yeah. theres no question a QB in round 2 with a guy like Carson already in place gets run past Lurie first. They got that approval and obviously feel no pressure right now.

If hes not good, and Dillard is a bust (even if Joe Douglas had a lot to do with it), and Reagor is a little D bag who wont give effort when his number isnt called, then things can begin to get warm. But its not as if theres any way these guys dont have another draft or 2 together. Theyre as job secure as you can get right now. Thats very clear. 

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

Yeah don’t seee SF giving up jimmy g, first for Rodgers if he’s on the decline like you said after this year if they regress.

the teams i think make more sense are broncos if that’s a BIG if Lock falters this year (elway needs to win soon and hes shown to go after older QBs— Flacco and Manning), Raiders (carr Easy to get out of contract and mariota would also have o not be good if he comes in for carr this year), redskins (Snyder factor and would require Haskins being a bust this year and rivera wants to move on). I think colts depending on rivers completely looks like crap. have the time to develop a QB (Eason was a 4th i think he’s a development guy until he’s ready so Rodgers after rivers would make some sense) so Rodgers could play a year Maybe two til Eason is there 

I meant the TEAM declines. If I had to predict , I’d say Green Bay finishes 9-7 this season. Take away each team’s QB in the nfc north and I’d say GB has the #4 roster. Rodgers has 2-3 more very good seasons in him, maybe more. 
 

And of the teams you mentioned, Raiders make a lot of sense. Them and the 49ers are my two favorite for Rodgers to finish his career with. 

I'm over the Hurts issue.  The season will play out and we'll see how it goes.

I firmly believe Howie, Doug, or both went to Lurie and simply said they are not confident that they can rely on Wentz to be there for them in the playoffs.  And they can't guarantee results without a better backup plan.  So they drafted Hurts.  We've debated the reasons.  They still got WRs, LBs, and DBs.  If 53 was used in other ways, they could have obtained different WRs, LBs, and DBs.  We'll see how our haul pans out in comparison to the alternatives.  If it doesn't look good, then Howie will get called on that.  If it does, then no one is going to bemoan their usage of #53.

I am far more concerned about the LT position at this point.

LII about to kick off on WIP. Extremely excited to listen. 

10 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

I meant the TEAM declines. If I had to predict , I’d say Green Bay finishes 9-7 this season. Take away each team’s QB in the nfc north and I’d say GB has the #4 roster. Rodgers has 2-3 more very good seasons in him, maybe more. 
 

And of the teams you mentioned, Raiders make a lot of sense. Them and the 49ers are my two favorite for Rodgers to finish his career with. 

I’m guessing if the team declines partially that has to do with Rodgers declining as well. They don’t have to be mutually exclusive. Still have a hard time seeing a team give up a 1st and a Qb who’s a An above average Qb For maybe 2 years of Rodgers.