A string of logic here on Dillard with some assertions...

Jason Peters is NOT coming back to "compete" for the LT job.  He'd return if the Eagles give it to him.

If the Eagles hand the LT job to Jason Peters at this point in the offseason, who no one else in the league wanted at a rotund, out of shape, and injury prone 38, then it means they have all but given up on Dillard after trading up for him in the first round 1 year ago.

Dillard turns 26 next year.  If they could not entrust the job to him this year, they will not look to him as the solution for 2021.  They'll make other arrangements, which may be costly.  He'll also have zero trade value at that point.

From our perspective, Dillard has performed admirably in spot duty at LT and was a really nice prospect.  So the mere act of signing Jason Peters is a tremendous disappointment that registers our 2019 first round pick as a bust and just completely crushes any confidence we should have in Roseman running drafts.

One thing about the "Howie/Pederson are drafting like they have the green light from Roseman and know they won't get fired" angle.  On its surface that's a very good thing IMO.

Yes obviously if they're wrong on the players than it sucks and they should be held accountable if they whiff hard and frequently.  But defensive drafting is a great way to slowly bleed a good team into a mediocre team. Splashy short-sighted Brownsian save-your-job drafts/off seasons are franchise killers.

30 minutes ago, hputenis said:

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.  

That's kind of my point - no one remembers that because of the Walker trade.  That whitewashed it and it got pushed aside... but how is it egregious?  So, you think it's a good idea to spend the #1 overall pick in the draft and IMMEDIATELY after that draft another QB in the Supplemental draft in the first round?   That's 2 exceedingly high draft picks on QBs at basically the exact same time.  Imagine in 1999 the Eagles draft McNabb #2 overall and then immediately use their 1st round pick the following year on Chad Pennington in the supplemental draft.

 

Yeah... no one remembers it.  It was 1989.  Look it up.  Troy Aikman #1 overall pick.  Spent the Round 1 Supplemental Draft pick on Steve Walsh, costing them the #1 overall pick in 1990 draft.  They still had a first round pick in 1990, thanks to the Hershel Walker trade.  That's where they landed Emmitt Smith (after a trade up with the Round 1 and 2 picks from Minnesota).  Dallas' own pick was Alexander Wright (WR) at the start of Round 2.  So... without the Walker deal, they come away in 1990 with the top pick -- Round 1 - Steve Walsh and Round 2 - Alexander Wright (WR).   That Walker trade covered up for their stupidity in that first Supplemental draft by Jimmy having to bring in his QB from Miami.  It might even be that the only reason that they didn't draft Blair Thomas that year (he went #2 overall) is because they couldn't having already wasted their pick on Walsh.  So, they take the 2nd highest RB... Smith.

 

As for the argument about putting weapons around a player, you could argue that maybe that supplemental pick on Walsh would have been better served to save to draft some OL for Aikman to protect him... he got beat to hell in his first few years in the NFL.  Richmond Webb went #9 in 1990.  Or, Cortez Kennedy (#3) - also a Miami guy, so he'd likely have been the pick.  Or Junior Seau (#5).   Point is, Jimmy doubled down on QB at #1 in back to back drafts but did it in the SAME offseason.  That's the epitome of stupid.  But, that huge mistake got whitewashed by the greater stupidity of the Vikings.

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

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. 

I don’t. Rodgers is still a stud that somehow takes below average to average rosters deep into the playoffs. Even him declining a little makes him a top 5 QB. 
 

Put Rodgers on that niners team in the super bowl and I think there’s a different outcome. 

Against the Peters signing happening...

The Eagles have been known to wing it heading into the season at certain positions.  ANYWHERE along the OL is not one of them, least of all LT.  They drafted a 26 year old fireman, seen as plug and play, in the first round the year that the draft came before FA just so that the LG position would not be left to chance.  

I get that no one in the NFL wants Peters.  I don't blame them and don't think he's in danger of getting scooped up.  But still...if they expect to fall back to him as the starting LT in 2020, then I have no idea why they have not signed him by now.  It's time to assemble the roster, and if you intend for him to be the LT, it's time to get him under contract.  

So that's my primary hope in this not happening.

 

10 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

A string of logic here on Dillard with some assertions...

Jason Peters is NOT coming back to "compete" for the LT job.  He'd return if the Eagles give it to him.

If the Eagles hand the LT job to Jason Peters at this point in the offseason, who no one else in the league wanted at a rotund, out of shape, and injury prone 38, then it means they have all but given up on Dillard after trading up for him in the first round 1 year ago.

Dillard turns 26 next year.  If they could not entrust the job to him this year, they will not look to him as the solution for 2021.  They'll make other arrangements, which may be costly.  He'll also have zero trade value at that point.

From our perspective, Dillard has performed admirably in spot duty at LT and was a really nice prospect.  So the mere act of signing Jason Peters is a tremendous disappointment that registers our 2019 first round pick as a bust and just completely crushes any confidence we should have in Roseman running drafts.

Joe Douglas

If they do sign Peters, I'm curious who the #2 LT would be for the inevitable rotation.  Dillard?  Prince?  Mailata?  Open competition between the 3?

And if the #2 LT seems a little more reliable and quicker in pass protection, would Doug have the balls to stop the rotation and put Peters on the bench?

6 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

I don’t. Rodgers is still a stud that somehow takes below average to average rosters deep into the playoffs. Even him declining a little makes him a top 5 QB. 
 

Put Rodgers on that niners team in the super bowl and I think there’s a different outcome. 

Possibly and probable. However you are also now a season removed from that team  (Rodgers older by another year) by the time you get Rodgers after the 2020 season. Rodgers would be 38 years old. I don’t see the niners giving up a 1st rounder for Rodgers when he’s likely at some point going to decline and you aren’t getting 35/36 year old Rodgers but getting 38 year old Rodgers. Add on he’s not been the epitome of health on top of that. So not only giving up a 1st but an above average starting caliber QB. Your thoughts on him in SF i can see. Giving up a starting caliber QB and a first i don’t for a 38 year old Rodgers. I don’t see anyone doing that. And i think the packers wouldn’t want jimmy g as they just drafted love. I’m guessing the niners would deal Jimmy G to make up for the compensation lost in the Rodgers deal. 

So much negativity in here.

Personally, I like to think I’m a realist. When Chip started blowing the team up after his first season, I was among the first to raise the alarm. It screamed poor personnel management to me. I don’t have that feeling about anything we did this year or last. 
 

What I think a lot of you are missing is how important depth is in general, and to the eagles organization in particular. The QB situation/Hurts has been covered extensively: pretty much every year our QB has missed games. No position in sports is more important or impactful and you aren’t likely to get even a mediocre one later in the draft.

Now people seem to be hyperventilating about bringing Peters back. Is he in his prime? No. Is he still better than most LTs? I think so. Dillard was drafted to be the future. We’d like him to be the present. But even if Dillard is an All-Pro, we don’t have anyone on the roster we can rely on to play if he gets hurt.

 I was the #1 proponent of drafting Mailata, and I have a lot of optimism about the possibility of him becoming a really good player, but let’s be real here: if our starter goes down in the playoffs, it would be terrifying to throw him into that situation. Likewise with Prince — naturally gifted rookie, but not someone you want your season to rely upon. So bringing Peters back makes sense. That creates depth no matter who starts.

 

5 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

If they do sign Peters, I'm curious who the #2 LT would be for the inevitable rotation.  Dillard?  Prince?  Mailata?  Open competition between the 3?

And if the #2 LT seems a little more reliable and quicker in pass protection, would Doug have the balls to stop the rotation and put Peters on the bench?

I think your discounting the possibility that Peters doesn’t start. He may come in and not win the job. Kind of like Long, they may say, "come back and compete.”

2 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

If they do sign Peters, I'm curious who the #2 LT would be for the inevitable rotation.  Dillard?  Prince?  Mailata?  Open competition between the 3?

And if the #2 LT seems a little more reliable and quicker in pass protection, would Doug have the balls to stop the rotation and put Peters on the bench?

If there’s one player I’d like to see in the preseason it’s Mailata. Dude has the upside to be an All-Pro but only way he gets better is with real-time reps. I’m hoping he takes the swing tackle roll this season. Especially since I think he’s athletic enough to be used as a TE on the goal line. 
 

I think Prince breaks a toenail and gets a medical redshirt. 
 

As far as your last question, Peters would have to look like Winston Justice from that Giants game back in the day to have even a 50/50 shot at getting benched. 

Do you think they tell Peters that Dillard is the starter but still give him good money to be the backup?

 

10 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Joe Douglas

Too early to judge, but he sure seemed to pick EVERY player I wanted in this draft.  

Just now, garingovt2000 said:

Do you think they tell Peters that Dillard is the starter but still give him good money to be the backup?

 

I think that is a lot more likely than most people in here seem to think.

2 minutes ago, hputenis said:

Too early to judge, but he sure seemed to pick EVERY player I wanted in this draft.  

what matters is that he sucked with us.

 

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

Possibly and probable. However you are also now a season removed from that team  (Rodgers older by another year) by the time you get Rodgers after the 2020 season. Rodgers would be 38 years old. I don’t see the niners giving up a 1st rounder for Rodgers when he’s likely at some point going to decline and you aren’t getting 35/36 year old Rodgers but getting 38 year old Rodgers. Add on he’s not been the epitome of health on top of that. So not only giving up a 1st but an above average starting caliber QB. Your thoughts on him in SF i can see. Giving up a starting caliber QB and a first i don’t for a 38 year old Rodgers. I don’t see anyone doing that. And i think the packers wouldn’t want jimmy g as they just drafted love. I’m guessing the niners would deal Jimmy G to make up for the compensation lost in the Rodgers deal. 

Well I’m talking more so if a trade were to happen now. If it happened next year they probably just roll with Love as their starting QB. Either way, the Niners would deal Jimmy G if they landed Rodgers. 
 

And I’m betting several teams would be willing to give up a 1st for Rodgers. Any team who feels like they’re close to competing for a title and want to upgrade their QB. 

9 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

If they do sign Peters, I'm curious who the #2 LT would be for the inevitable rotation.  Dillard?  Prince?  Mailata?  Open competition between the 3?

And if the #2 LT seems a little more reliable and quicker in pass protection, would Doug have the balls to stop the rotation and put Peters on the bench?

How did we go from Dillard having a pretty good rookie season at LT and having a bright future to questioning if he'd be behind Mailata or Prince on the depth chart (if we signed Peters)?  😂  Besides 5 beat reporters attacking this story at the same time like  vultures, this has all changed without any play on the field. 

2 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

what matters is that he sucked with us.

 

How do we know it was Joe that sucked instead of Howie?  The only thing I've read is that Joe set the board, but Howie had the final say.  If anyone is gonna veto or change a pick at the last second, Howie sure seems like the guy to do it!  

8 minutes ago, TEW said:

I think your discounting the possibility that Peters doesn’t start. He may come in and not win the job. Kind of like Long, they may say, "come back and compete.”

I am 100% discounting that possibility.  I really don't think Peters would come back with less than a guarantee.  Peters hasn't even participated in camp in years. 

This is a HOF LT who is beloved by owner, HC, and position coach.  I'd be less surprised if they cut Wentz tomorrow than I would if they brought Peters back, dragged his a** through camp, and then didn't start him week 1.

He's not coming here to fight for a job.

Who knows though; the Eagles are nothing if not unpredictable.

4 minutes ago, hputenis said:

How do we know it was Joe that sucked instead of Howie?  The only thing I've read is that Joe set the board, but Howie had the final say.  If anyone is gonna veto or change a pick at the last second, Howie sure seems like the guy to do it!  

If I let my 3 year old set a board and I had final say but we stuck to the board my draft would be horrible. Howie was handicapped by Joe setting the board. Its not a fair evaluation to judge Howie on those picks. Also, according to the article about the tie breaker on the JJAW pick, Howie wasnt the tie breaker. The people with more "clout" broke the tie, and Howie chose their guy. They used Howie as their puppet. He might turn in the card, but they werent necessarily his picks. 

Joe presided over 3? drafts here, and they all quite sucked. Hes gone, and Howie picked a whole bunch of exciting athletic players. We will see how that turns out but one thing is for sure- we are so lucky Joe is finally gone. 

3 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

Well I’m talking more so if a trade were to happen now. If it happened next year they probably just roll with Love as their starting QB. Either way, the Niners would deal Jimmy G if they landed Rodgers. 
 

And I’m betting several teams would be willing to give up a 1st for Rodgers. Any team who feels like they’re close to competing for a title and want to upgrade their QB. 

If any team would be willing to sit their future franchise QB for 3 years, I agree it would be Green Bay.  Worked well for them the 1st time, but it is still an exception.  If Love is sitting for 3 years, it won't be behind anyone other than Rodgers.  If they end up trading Rodgers next offseason for some reason, then Love will be the starter.  

I think bringing JP back is a win-win. You know he's going to miss some games, so Dillard will still get his chance to start. We'll get a chance to see how he does. Maybe even see if there's a competitive light going off for losing the starting job? We need a backup tackle anyway. I don't think anyone is confident in Mailata/Prince/Driscoll being in that role quite yet.

I see 2020 as a bridge year for Dillard, in this case.

2 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

I think bringing JP back is a win-win. You know he's going to miss some games, so Dillard will still get his chance to start. We'll get a chance to see how he does. Maybe even see if there's a competitive light going off for losing the starting job? We need a backup tackle anyway. I don't think anyone is confident in Mailata/Prince/Driscoll being in that role quite yet.

Dillard doesn't seem like the personality type that would respond positively to this type of motivation.  As for the the rest of your post....

Interview with Sal Pal discussing the draft and roster construction, specifically regarding Reagor, Hurts, and Dillard.  He really doesn’t like 2 of these guys:

 

1 minute ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

Well I’m talking more so if a trade were to happen now. If it happened next year they probably just roll with Love as their starting QB. Either way, the Niners would deal Jimmy G if they landed Rodgers. 
 

And I’m betting several teams would be willing to give up a 1st for Rodgers. Any team who feels like they’re close to competing for a title and want to upgrade their QB. 

I’m guessing the packers really have no interest in dealing him right now. First if they deal before June 1st it’s 45 mil dead money hit. And even after June 1st it’s 14.3 mil dead money. So that’s highly unlikely they just take 14.3 to get rid of him. Second why then take on Jimmy g’s contract which is more money added on to the dead money. If their roster is the 4th best in the division with Rodgers on it then jimmy G isn’t making you for all thay. At that point you likely aren’t constructed to win with Jimmy G’a skills compared to Rodgers you are better off just giving love the reps and snaps and seeing what happens and getting him experience.

Would Rodgers if they were willing to deal him this year fetch a nice pick? Yes. Still don’t see the niners giving up jimmy g and a first and a mid round pick. I still doubt it happens this year. We are already in May and it wouldn’t likely happen til June cap ramifications. I highly doubt it this year.