3 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Only one player capable of leading this team. Shew could fill in for a game….he’s no leader. 

BS He was a starting QB before,so that's a load of BULLISH

3 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Top offense in the league you’d think would give us a decent shot in the postseason

We don't know what we have. Last year was a BS season as far as competition(I mean intense competition not 3rd stringers) and we really have NO idea if Hurts improved enough. So jury is out for me. We look fine ON PAPER,now we need to back it up

33 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

Actually, the cap was a necessity once the courts forced the NFL to have free agency. 

 

As for the changes to the NFL over the years --- it's been mostly due to the innovation in the passing game. We had teams in the old days that loved to pass. The Chargers during "Air Coryell" had a great group of receivers including TE, Kellen Winslow. The Raiders had Todd Christensen at TE in the early to mid 80s. Dan Marino passed for over 5000 yards in 1984. The thing is, it was the balanced teams with good defenses that won championships. So the rest of the league wasn't modeling their teams after the Chargers or Dolphins. Bill Walsh brought a lot of new concepts into passing games with the WCO, and had success, but he still had a balanced offense and a great defense. He showed that HBs, FBs, and TEs can all be factors in the passing game and defenses would often be forced into mismatches in coverage. A lot of coaches over the next two decades came from that coaching tree and eventually you had guys like Andy Reid that said Short passes were an extension of the running game. Eventually FBs were all but phased out of the NFL. Teams now want more than 1 TE that can catch. Analytics has become a huge part of play-calling now. Base defenses now often start games with 5 DBs on the field. Naturally, short passes have increased and are being designed to "pick" defenders. Because of the increase in short passes, completion percentages have gone up. NFL talent evaluators prefer coverage skills in DBs to tackling skills, so we have seen less physicality in the average CB's play. All that leads to today's NFL. 

So, philosophically, there has been continual change. But football can still be played with the old philosophies. We all know that the NFL brought in a bunch of "player safety" rules that have changed how you can hit, but those hits still happen and they just tack on penalty yards. Back to my point about old philosophies ... I was extremely interested in what Harbaugh was doing in Baltimore. There's no doubt in my mind that if the Ravens right now had the defense they had in 2000, they would be dominating games with their current offensive philosophy. Defenses have adapted to try to counter the trending offensive philosophies (I.e. defending the pass) and have almost been daring teams to run on them. Heck, even the Eagles took advantage of this last season and turned their season around. If a team like the Ravens, the Titans, or the Eagles wins a Super Bowl by relying on the ground game, you will see other teams begin to shift philosophies again. The bottom line is it doesn't make sense to pass against a team that can't stop the run. That's why I wasn't excited about the signing of Nnamdi Asomugha. People were saying he was great because teams weren't passing his way --- that's because opponents were averaging 5 yards per run against the Raiders. There was no reason to throw it --- period. 

SO there were many changes,as I stated. We can pick apart every position on teams and how they have changed. Even now the LB position is changing,more hybrid types. Players are asked to do multiple roles. Used to be you played what you played and that was it. Now players need to be much more diverse, so I wil stand by my thoughts that it has changed quite a bit. I loved watching Gates and Tomlinson play. Still 2 of my fav players. Besides Fran Tarkenton,which other QB was a "running" QB in those days?

34 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

Actually, the cap was a necessity once the courts forced the NFL to have free agency

So that is a HUGE change yes?

17 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

LMAO wow you can foresee who is a bad pick when you make it? why don't you lend your crystal ball to the FO so they know in advance

Again….that’s not even the point. The point was about should this team be investing not even in that year’s cap….but future cap money for the 2019 and 2020 teams. Really keep going until you uncluster it enough. It takes some restraint. Job security is crucial also. Very difficult to be patient and clear cap money when you’re new on the job. Rosie was in a fairly ideal situation though.

19 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

BS He was a starting QB before,so that's a load of BULLISH

Starting QB and LEADER aren’t the same thing. But even then they tried to replace him.

19 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

We don't know what we have. Last year was a BS season as far as competition(I mean intense competition not 3rd stringers) and we really have NO idea if Hurts improved enough. So jury is out for me. We look fine ON PAPER,now we need to back it up

If we back up to your bar…that’s the top offense in the league. So I’d clearly expect to make some postseason noise with the top O in football.

17 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

SO there were many changes,as I stated. We can pick apart every position on teams and how they have changed. Even now the LB position is changing,more hybrid types. Players are asked to do multiple roles. Used to be you played what you played and that was it. Now players need to be much more diverse, so I wil stand by my thoughts that it has changed quite a bit. I loved watching Gates and Tomlinson play. Still 2 of my fav players. Besides Fran Tarkenton,which other QB was a "running" QB in those days?

Bernie Kosar had like 74 rushing yards one season

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

SO there were many changes,as I stated. We can pick apart every position on teams and how they have changed. Even now the LB position is changing,more hybrid types. Players are asked to do multiple roles. Used to be you played what you played and that was it. Now players need to be much more diverse, so I wil stand by my thoughts that it has changed quite a bit. I loved watching Gates and Tomlinson play. Still 2 of my fav players. Besides Fran Tarkenton,which other QB was a "running" QB in those days?

 

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

So that is a HUGE change yes?

Back to my original point, these aren't things that prevent us from comparing players from different eras. Brees had an up and down start to his career. McNabb's early career accolades weren't because he was some sort of precision passer, they were because he was a dual threat that accounted for a large chunk of the offensive production. 

We can talk about change all day, like you said ... DBs used to have to wear numbers from the 20s-40s ... but that isn't relevant to player comparisons. 

Versatile players and/or hybrids isn't really a new concept. It's just more popular now. Todd Bell was a safety/LB. William Thomas was very light for a LB when we drafted him. Byars played HB, FB, and TE for us. Cunningham punted for us. Danny White played QB and punter for the cowboys. Terry Bradshaw returned kicks for the Steelers. 

2 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Again….that’s not even the point. The point was about should this team be investing not even in that year’s cap….but future cap money for the 2019 and 2020 teams. Really keep going until you uncluster it enough. It takes some restraint. Job security is crucial also. Very difficult to be patient and clear cap money when you’re new on the job. Rosie was in a fairly ideal situation though.

Yes it IS the point. You can't count "bad luck"(aka injury) as a means to bash FO decisions. Chances of both your top WR's going down at the same time are???? But bash the FO because they made the investment? makes no sense. Once again hindsight is a wonderful thing. How well would Hurts do if we lost Smith and AJ at the same time? My guess is he would suffer statistically(you know like Wentz did)?

57 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

 

Back to my original point, these aren't things that prevent us from comparing players from different eras. Brees had an up and down start to his career. McNabb's early career accolades weren't because he was some sort of precision passer, they were because he was a dual threat that accounted for a large chunk of the offensive production. 

We can talk about change all day, like you said ... DBs used to have to wear numbers from the 20s-40s ... but that isn't relevant to player comparisons. 

Versatile players and/or hybrids isn't really a new concept. It's just more popular now. Todd Bell was a safety/LB. William Thomas was very light for a LB when we drafted him. Byars played HB, FB, and TE for us. Cunningham punted for us. Danny White played QB and punter for the cowboys. Terry Bradshaw returned kicks for the Steelers. 

Your original point was things didn't change much and I disagree. Player numbers are immaterial to this convo. Those players you mentioned were rarities then. I never said they didn't exist. But now it's almost mandatory you can do more than 1 thing

3 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Starting QB and LEADER aren’t the same thing. But even then they tried to replace him.

Uh,they(Jags) spent a round 1 draft pick?? Of course he's going to start( not only that the TOP round 1 QB). Has zero to do with his(shew's) leadership and in fact the players like him as well as Hurts,Jax thinks they chose a better QB. They wanted to get rid of any threat to that(unlike how we handled the Wentz debacle). We saw a chance to grab an adequate BU or we would NOT HAVE MADE the move. He came cheaper than what we paid Daniels LOL. So once again your point is BS. I suppose Foles had no leadership skills either? Nah he only got us the only ring we have. Shew is every bit as good as Foles

3 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Starting QB and LEADER aren’t the same thing. But even then they tried to replace him.

Hurts may be a leader,now we need to see if he is a starting caliber NFL QB

3 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

If we back up to your bar…that’s the top offense in the league. So I’d clearly expect to make some postseason noise with the top O in football.

It's on paper. Game days are a different animal. You don't win on paper,we need to back it up. I want Hurts to show me by week 4 he is capable of making NFL decisions and getting the ball to these "top" guys we have now. We have 2 1,000 yd WR's,I want/need them both to get there,anything less is a fail. There are no more excuses to hand out. Hurts needs to let Sanders score near the GL instead of ball hogging. It's sad when your best RB has ZERO TD's ALL year. JJ got 1800 yards his ROOKIE year,by HIMSELF.  

12 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Uh,they(Jags) spent a round 1 draft pick?? Of course he's going to start( not only that the TOP round 1 QB). Has zero to do with his(shew's) leadership and in fact the players like him as well as Hurts,Jax thinks they chose a better QB. They wanted to get rid of any threat to that(unlike how we handled the Wentz debacle). We saw a chance to grab an adequate BU or we would NOT HAVE MADE the move. He came cheaper than what we paid Daniels LOL. So once again your point is BS. I suppose Foles had no leadership skills either? Nah he only got us the only ring we have. Shew is every bit as good as Foles

They turned to Foles

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Your original point was things didn't change much and I disagree. Player numbers are immaterial to this convo. Those players you mentioned were rarities then. I never said they didn't exist. But now it's almost mandatory you can do more than 1 thing

 

At this point and time all we can do is wait. The FO will make there decision on Hurts at the end of this season. They will either be looking to extend or getting a new QB don’t see any middle ground on this stance.

On ‎7‎/‎11‎/‎2022 at 8:17 AM, brkmsn said:

I don't believe the NFL has changed as much as people want others to think, when comparing players of the past to today, but I do believe the college game has transformed a lot (at the coaching level) which makes QBs and WRs a little more prepared for the NFL as rookies than in the "old days."

The FO needs to make the right decision. If you are developing a player that needs more time, you have to give him more time. If the player isn't showing signs of growth or taking to the  coaching, you move on. Moving on is an even bigger risk, though. So if your project is developing at a reasonable rate, you keep going forward with it. 

Three years is plenty of Time today. As you mentioned these QB's have much more preparation than the QB's of the 70's and 80's Before they throw a pass in the NFL. Terry Bradshaw was the 2nd highest paid player at one point making $470 which is less than league minimum today. He was a stupid QB and probably would not have even made it today as teams would not have the patience to teach him. He took years to learn the game. Today is different. A player will not get more than three years, unless they are behind a elite QB like Rodgers or Brady. Hurts will sink or swim this year. I don't think anyone debates that except maybe you and Ham.....

18 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

https://heavy.com/sports/philadelphia-eagles/jimmy-smith-free-agency/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Philadelphia Eagles July 12&utm_content=Philadelphia Eagles July 12+CID_56176369bafdecd9541ee3ec830721c9&utm_source=Campaign Monitor&utm_term=Click here for the full story

eye test doesn't put points on the scoreboard. Jimmy Smith would be a great add

Yeah... look at the scoreboard, forget the fantasy stuff.   Who scores doesn't matter...if the offense looks good and it's guys other than Sanders, Smith or Brown scoring the TDs...that's fine.   We judge the QB on the whole picture.

18 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Not what happened. But it was 7 on 7 with backups. So a sack isn’t even possible. It wasn’t a teammate from anything I’ve heard either. But whatever….June minicamp ….10 plays…don’t care that much. Everything else I’ve heard has been about how markedly improved Hurts looks. Media guys…especially in Gunn’s position, losing his job, need some kind of click bait this time of year.

Barrett Brooks is losing his job?

18 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

So signing DJax and Malik….guaranteeing another season of Alshon were wise moves in your book? They were bad moves IMO. Not hindsight since I said it then….and ever since. But where were we going in 2019 and 2020? I just don’t believe in spend spend spend. It was the very logical time to clear cap so the future could more rapidly flourish. Seems very obvious in hindsight….some still don’t see it…but I’ve been saying it since it was happening. So don’t play me on hindsight here.

So if they signed other guys that actually performed ... wouldn't that have been better?

Again, not a cap or all in issue....it's poor player selection.   Totally different. 

30 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

So if they signed other guys that actually performed ... wouldn't that have been better?

Again, not a cap or all in issue....it's poor player selection.   Totally different. 

Ham was also one of the people I argued with when the Eagles first signed Alshon. He said at the time he was absolutely worth the 14 mil from Chicago. I said no way and would have rather spent on a cheaper version...... Then the Eagles signed him to a 52 million dollar deal in December of 2017. So the Eagles were capped out at that point. The contract later on was to minimize that cap hit, so the damage was already done IMO....

1 hour ago, stine said:

Ham was also one of the people I argued with when the Eagles first signed Alshon. He said at the time he was absolutely worth the 14 mil from Chicago. I said no way and would have rather spent on a cheaper version...... Then the Eagles signed him to a 52 million dollar deal in December of 2017. So the Eagles were capped out at that point. The contract later on was to minimize that cap hit, so the damage was already done IMO....

Nah...the first signing if Alshon was absolutely worth it.  In 2019 vs Miami he was the best player on the field... hie injuries were his issue.  But that's beside the point... the Eagles have still been able to make moves each year except for last year.  Which they would have been able to do if they kept Wentz and redid his deal.   

Dallas on the other hand hasn't signed guys that haven't performed..yet still can't make moves.  That's because they can’t manage the cap.

13 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

They turned to Foles

They had no other options at that time

4 hours ago, joemas6 said:

So if they signed other guys that actually performed ... wouldn't that have been better?

Again, not a cap or all in issue....it's poor player selection.   Totally different. 

Shouldn’t have signed anyone at the point

3 hours ago, stine said:

Ham was also one of the people I argued with when the Eagles first signed Alshon. He said at the time he was absolutely worth the 14 mil from Chicago. I said no way and would have rather spent on a cheaper version...... Then the Eagles signed him to a 52 million dollar deal in December of 2017. So the Eagles were capped out at that point. The contract later on was to minimize that cap hit, so the damage was already done IMO....

Alshon was a great signing. Guaranteeing that final season was just stupid though.