11 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

It shouldn't be no... Let's just hope it wasn't in part that he was a rookie and teams didn't know what to expect. 

As long as Duce is here, I have no confidence Sanders will be given the amount of touches that he deserves. Duce will continue going with the cold hand, forcing his RBBC. 

33 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Sanders tried to bounce too many runs outside and had trouble reading holes inside early in the season. I don’t think that should be much of a debate. 

What he did later in the year doesn’t erase that or make anyone’s early complaints about him wrong. He got better.  

This is absolutely spot-on. Anyone who argued that Sanders was a bust based on his first few games was being ridiculous. But it's also fair to say that he showed some tendencies early on that needed to be addressed. Thankfully they were, and he proved to be extremely promising during the second half of the year.

I think we can all agree that he's a good player and we're all excited about the potential he offers our favorite team. 

Learning the RB position as a rookie in the NFL is not as complex as many other positions, but it still has a learning curve.

Hesitation is synonymous with failure for a running back.  And no, I'm obviously not talking about Laveon Bell in his prime with his trademark hesitate, read, and go style in the backfield.  You could have an elite athlete behind a great OL...if he hesitates and isn't confident in where he is supposed to be and that first step, then you are better off with Reno Mahe hitting the hole.  Even a clueless WR with great athleticism can fully function on a couple go-routes.  

Everyone has their own learning curve, but it is not surprising and is perfectly acceptable for a rookie RB to look sluggish in the backfield for a few weeks.  We saw it with Westbrook, Mccoy, and Sanders as rookies.  If you have the same problems in November of year 1, then it's time to worry.  Sanders is right on schedule.  IMO, he was better in year 1 than Westbrook/Mccoy.

An interesting parallel is Ryan Moats.  That guy was an exceptionally talented runner.  It was only 278 yards on 55 carries, but he showed as much raw running talent and explosiveness as a rookie as our big 3 did.  Then the severe fumbling problems got in his head and he completely lost his decisiveness and quickness/explosion to the hole.  He's evidence as to how critical the mental side of the position can be.

 

10 minutes ago, wtfcares said:

As long as Duce is here, I have no confidence Sanders will be given the amount of touches that he deserves. Duce will continue going with the cold hand, forcing his RBBC. 

I'd like to get 5 more years out of Sanders at a very high level.  I'd also like this to be a dominant 2020 offense, not a 1995 one...which means Sanders needs to be used as a weapon, not a crutch who gets 20+ low-leverage between the tackle carries per game.

If Sanders gets the amount of touches that are commonly associated with a 3 down feature back, we will not be able to satisfy the above two conditions.

4 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I'd like to get 5 more years out of Sanders at a very high level.  I'd also like this to be a dominant 2020 offense, not a 1995 one...which means Sanders needs to be used as a weapon, not a crutch who gets 20+ low-leverage between the tackle carries per game.

If Sanders gets the amount of touches that are commonly associated with a 3 down feature back, we will not be able to satisfy the above two conditions.

I’m all for not overusing him, but let’s be real the Eagles are not going to be a team that runs the ball 30+ times a game. Well be lucky to average 25 runs a game. Sanders should be getting about 20 touches which would not be overusing. 
 

If he’s yanked out after every 2nd good run he has, he will never be able to get into a rhythm to succeed. Same problem we’ve had with Duce’s use of Howard, Ajayi, and Murray. 

25 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I'd like to get 5 more years out of Sanders at a very high level.  I'd also like this to be a dominant 2020 offense, not a 1995 one...which means Sanders needs to be used as a weapon, not a crutch who gets 20+ low-leverage between the tackle carries per game.

If Sanders gets the amount of touches that are commonly associated with a 3 down feature back, we will not be able to satisfy the above two conditions.

Getting 5 more years of Sanders at a very high level means you are giving him a 2nd contract. Personally, I'm not sure I would give any RB who will command pro bowl level money a second deal.

As far as usage and the modern offense, Alvin Kamara gets about 13 carries and 6 catches per game.  Would 15 and 6 be over use? Because if you do that, you can reasonably project Sanders to have about 1,100 yards rushing and 950 yards receiving. 

1 hour ago, Asg 15 said:

He took this outside. I have to think he figured he could just use his speed to get outside like he did in college. Not unusual for a rookie.

Stills mean nothing.  Show the whole play.

2 hours ago, QBhunter58 said:

Yeah he looked like he was catching up to the NFL speed with his running game. But he was awesome in open space as a receiver early in the year. He was pretty much our only big play threat for most of the year

 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

Sanders tried to bounce too many runs outside and had trouble reading holes inside early in the season. I don’t think that should be much of a debate. 

What he did later in the year doesn’t erase that or make anyone’s early complaints about him wrong. He got better.  

Like nearly all rookie RBs.  Yet many people wanted to call him a bust and even used the term wasted draft pick.  The criticisms leveled at him were ridiculous, especially at the point in the season that it was, and what else was available.  Some went so far as to claim th hat he should never be used to run the ball.  It's a shame we can't go back to revisit the over the top hot takes from then.  He was inexperienced as Penn State barely used him, due to Barkley's presence.   But not giving the ball to him wasn't going to help him improve.  

I'm not saying he was great early, I'm saying the over the top criticisms were unwarranted.  He WAS the only big play threat after DeSean went down... and so they needed his speed on the field.  He was the only fast player available and he took advantage.   

But now that the season has played out, people who were calling him a bust and a waste want to act like they weren't being ridiculous then.  Nah they were then, and they are being doubly so now by not just saying, "I was wrong." 

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

 

Like nearly all rookie RBs.  Yet many people wanted to call him a bust and even used the term wasted draft pick.  The criticisms leveled at him were ridiculous, especially at the point in the season that it was, and what else was available.  Some went so far as to claim th hat he should never be used to run the ball.  It's a shame we can't go back to revisit the over the top hot takes from then.  He was inexperienced as Penn State barely used him, due to Barkley's presence.   But not giving the ball to him wasn't going to help him improve.  

I'm not saying he was great early, I'm saying the over the top criticisms were unwarranted.  He WAS the only big play threat after DeSean went down... and so they needed his speed on the field.  He was the only fast player available and he took advantage.   

But now that the season has played out, people who were calling him a bust and a waste want to act like they weren't being ridiculous then.  Nah they were then, and they are being doubly so now by not just saying, "I was wrong." 

I don’t recall people calling him a bust or saying he shouldn’t ever be handed the ball. I certainly never did. I do remember people being critical of him as a runner, and they were right. 

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

 

Like nearly all rookie RBs.  Yet many people wanted to call him a bust and even used the term wasted draft pick.  The criticisms leveled at him were ridiculous, especially at the point in the season that it was, and what else was available.  Some went so far as to claim th hat he should never be used to run the ball.  It's a shame we can't go back to revisit the over the top hot takes from then.  He was inexperienced as Penn State barely used him, due to Barkley's presence.   But not giving the ball to him wasn't going to help him improve.  

I'm not saying he was great early, I'm saying the over the top criticisms were unwarranted.  He WAS the only big play threat after DeSean went down... and so they needed his speed on the field.  He was the only fast player available and he took advantage.   

But now that the season has played out, people who were calling him a bust and a waste want to act like they weren't being ridiculous then.  Nah they were then, and they are being doubly so now by not just saying, "I was wrong." 

I’m not sure if you remember but TATE was calling LeSean McCoy a bust as well after his first 6-7 games or so.  So it’s not surprising. 

1 minute ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t recall people calling him a bust, and I certainly never did. I do remember people being critical of him as a runner. 

There were, and even our very own HE, I believe, called it a wasted play to ever hand him the ball on a run. 

1 minute ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t recall people calling him a bust or saying he shouldn’t ever be handed the ball. I certainly never did. I do remember people being critical of him as a runner, and they were right. 

Nah. There were people calling him a bust and a wasted draft pick, saying he was a huge reach, etc etc  Maybe not so much in the Blog but certainly in TATE. 

13 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

 

Like nearly all rookie RBs.  Yet many people wanted to call him a bust and even used the term wasted draft pick.  The criticisms leveled at him were ridiculous, especially at the point in the season that it was, and what else was available.  Some went so far as to claim th hat he should never be used to run the ball.  It's a shame we can't go back to revisit the over the top hot takes from then.  He was inexperienced as Penn State barely used him, due to Barkley's presence.   But not giving the ball to him wasn't going to help him improve.  

I'm not saying he was great early, I'm saying the over the top criticisms were unwarranted.  He WAS the only big play threat after DeSean went down... and so they needed his speed on the field.  He was the only fast player available and he took advantage.   

But now that the season has played out, people who were calling him a bust and a waste want to act like they weren't being ridiculous then.  Nah they were then, and they are being doubly so now by not just saying, "I was wrong." 

Its weird that youre on this tirade about the unwarranted criticism from way back then because no one said anything like that today. 

17 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t recall people calling him a bust or saying he shouldn’t ever be handed the ball. I certainly never did. I do remember people being critical of him as a runner, and they were right. 

Its true through the first 4 weeks of the season. Remember a lot of people didnt like the pick. Myself included. I felt that he was a reach in round 2 which was frustrating after passing on all the great RBs in the previous drafts. 

Through the first 4 weeks or so he was actually bad at running the ball, and had some fumble issues as well. While Howard was playing very well. I think I may remember myself saying that every carry by Sanders is a wasted play. At the time, it was very true. Other people were calling him a bust. 

Through weeks 4-8 you could see him coming on in the receiving game and every once in a while a little flash as a runner.

By week 8 he was looking good and by the end of the season he was looking totally awesome. 

 

When he comes in with legitimate knocks on his game and every one of them shows up, its plenty warranted for those not crazy about the pick to think he may not be very good. And yet by the end of the season he has about 0 doubters left. Theres really nothing for IP to be complaining about right now. 

 

On 6/13/2020 at 8:42 AM, Iggles_Phan said:

Nah... anyone could have flipped the ball to Burton (or should be able to).  

I think his couple nice plays on that drive had the Pats keying on him at the snap. He was a likely go-to at the goal line and his acting helped sell the idea. Any way you slice it though...41-33...

3 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Its true through the first 4 weeks of the season. Remember a lot of people didnt like the pick. Myself included. I felt that he was a reach in round 2 which was frustrating after passing on all the great RBs in the previous drafts. 

Through the first 4 weeks or so he was actually bad at running the ball, and had some fumble issues as well. While Howard was playing very well. I think I may remember myself saying that every carry by Sanders is a wasted play. At the time, it was very true. Other people were calling him a bust. 

Through weeks 4-8 you could see him coming on in the receiving game and every once in a while a little flash as a runner.

By week 8 he was looking good and by the end of the season he was looking totally awesome. 

 

When he comes in with legitimate knocks on his game and every one of them shows up, its plenty warranted for those not crazy about the pick to think he may not be very good. And yet by the end of the season he has about 0 doubters left. Theres really nothing for IP to be complaining about right now. 

 

Cautionary tale.   And those 'wasted plays' are what enabled him to become the back we saw down the stretch when he was needed the most.  It's going to be very much the same this year, patience needs to be practiced with these young guys.  And should have been practiced more last year.   JJAW disappointed, Sanders came along slow.  Dillard flashed at LT and then burned at RT.  None of these guys are now what they will be.  But judging a pick after 3, 4 or even 8 weeks is silly.  It has been in the past, and will be more so this year.

21 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Its weird that youre on this tirade about the unwarranted criticism from way back then because no one said anything like that today. 

Someone brought up his slow start... I didnt bring it up.

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Cautionary tale.   And those 'wasted plays' are what enabled him to become the back we saw down the stretch when he was needed the most.  It's going to be very much the same this year, patience needs to be practiced with these young guys.  And should have been practiced more last year.   JJAW disappointed, Sanders came along slow.  Dillard flashed at LT and then burned at RT.  None of these guys are now what they will be.  But judging a pick after 3, 4 or even 8 weeks is silly.  It has been in the past, and will be more so this year.

Someone brought up his slow start... I didnt bring it up.

he had a slow start. no reason to fly off the chain over that. the person was right. It wasnt unwarranted criticism. 

Having recommended Arguing about Slavery, i picked it up again and am enjoying it as much as ever. Miller writes a delicious prose. I had forgotten how late John Quincy Adams makes his appearance - it’s not until about page 150, but when he does...

My copy of Moby Dick is 667 pages long and Moby Dick doesn’t make an appearance until page 597. But when he does...

Just now, HazletonEagle said:

he had a slow start. no reason to fly off the chain over that. the person was right. It wasnt unwarranted criticism. 

The criticism that was levied at the time was. 

4 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Cautionary tale.   And those 'wasted plays' are what enabled him to become the back we saw down the stretch when he was needed the most.  It's going to be very much the same this year, patience needs to be practiced with these young guys.  And should have been practiced more last year.   JJAW disappointed, Sanders came along slow.  Dillard flashed at LT and then burned at RT.  None of these guys are now what they will be.  But judging a pick after 3, 4 or even 8 weeks is silly.  It has been in the past, and will be more so this year.

 

well, no one should have called him a  bust. But that is a discussion for months ago. Not today. No one said that since like October. 

Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

The criticism that was levied at the time was. 

 

1 minute ago, HazletonEagle said:

well, no one should have called him a  bust. But that is a discussion for months ago. Not today. No one said that since like October. 

 

You got something better related to football to talk about?

 

As for what should have been back then... yeah, no one should have called him a bust, a reach, etc., but plenty did.   I'd like to see that not happen this year.  But, invariably some week, probably even Week 1... Reagor will likely get 2 catches for 12 yards, CD Lamb will get 5 rec for 120 yards and a TD and some fools will go off like a 4 alarm fire.   Meanwhile, the Eagles will win, and Dallas will lose, but somehow the Eagles will be the dumbest organization in the history of professional sports.

3 hours ago, RLC said:

Sheldon was a great #2 CB. Could handle #2 WRs without help, consistent, strong in the run game, a leader, etc.  

Plus he almost killed Reggie Bush

Ryan Moats was tough to handle as a fan. The dude certainly had running talent, but almost 100% of his big plays were around the outside. That was really all he ever tried to do. The guy had no running vision at all, and instinctively, habitually, and constantly bounced everything wide. It was maddening. I also remember some ESPN dude saying he was better than Westbrook after some game where he had a couple nice runs.

1 hour ago, TEW said:

Getting 5 more years of Sanders at a very high level means you are giving him a 2nd contract. Personally, I'm not sure I would give any RB who will command pro bowl level money a second deal.

As far as usage and the modern offense, Alvin Kamara gets about 13 carries and 6 catches per game.  Would 15 and 6 be over use? Because if you do that, you can reasonably project Sanders to have about 1,100 yards rushing and 950 yards receiving. 

I think Kamara is the perfect model for both style and volume.  

38 minutes ago, justrelax said:

Having recommended Arguing about Slavery, i picked it up again and am enjoying it as much as ever. Miller writes a delicious prose. I had forgotten how late John Quincy Adams makes his appearance - it’s not until about page 150, but when he does...

My copy of Moby Dick is 667 pages long and Moby Dick doesn’t make an appearance until page 597. But when he does...

I've never read Moby Dick.  It's it worth the time investment?