3 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Good stuff...I will look into this more after the season when I know which pick we get.

Yeah if the pick falls,no worries. if we miss Murphy they(both are from Clemson) also have a nice DT in Bresee who should go around 9/10 somewhere. So really we can't lose here IMO. Murph is the movable DE and Bresee is a DT

37 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

10 is NOT a non factor Bresee will be in that area. Another DT to add with Davis means we don't have to go scout and grab old guys to fill in the blanks(unless we CHOOSE TO) I believe everyone in round 1 is usable,or why would they be there? Would have to really be a CRAP no talent draft. But they just keep cranking out better college players,SO I can't see that. Gibbs as the 2nd RB off the board at 32 seems like extreme value and for sure a "factor" in our RBBC if that's how things go

A bit of dream like logic here. When has all the first round selections ever been usable. Think the percentages are more like 50/50 on first round with it decreasing as reach round progresses. You actually out loud contemplated why every round one pick could possibly be a bust. News flash: happens every year….all the time. Doesn’t have to be a crap no talent draft. It’s just plainly called The Draft.

  RBs have the least considered value league wide than any position(not specialties like P and long snapper). Most of the best franchise level RBs don’t even go until round two. If you take a RB round one he better be considered the elite beast! Heck I feel that way about round two RB. I’d much rather just pay Sanders 7 mil and continue with him being our RB given breathers by his friends occasionally than invest a first round pick to step backwards into a committee backfield. If he’s round one….and sharing the load with Scott we really screwed up. Round one RB better dominate the backfield touches. Just my two cents in that subject.

4 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I’ll own the first one. Everybody around Ziggy raved at the NFL level how elite a pass rusher he was. Lions screwed up his career. Great player….terrible organization. But Lane has proven to be an elite player for years for us when not suspended or disappearing midseason.

 The others…I can, AT BEST,  only say those statements tell half the story. As positive as I can make out of your glaring tunnel vision ignoring all aspects.

Yes...we differ.  I like to address specific issues directly.  One at a time.

I like the QB sneak play because it is simple and direct and a means to solve a specific issue.  You need a yard...not the time for E= mc2.

I believe successful people keep things simple ...I believe people that struggle make things complicated. 

I believe that in spades when looking at our Eagles front office.  The more simple they keep things the better the results.  

Yes we differ... you ask a simple question,  I give a simple answer.  If we want to get into more complicated stuff to go further on depth on the topic ..that comes later.    I don't deflect or spin or try to make it complicated to try to make myself sound smart.

I learned that first year in my business...nobody cares about the complicated stuff, they want to know the bottom line and how you can help. You lose people talking about the other stuff

When we negotiate with Sanders,he needs to know a RB is on the table. I'm sure he knows LOL. So he can old out if he wants,if it's too high see ya!

1 hour ago, joemas6 said:

I don't think anyone on here is of that mindset.    

I have been forced to back off making what I consider obvious assumptions around here. So we all can recognize the benefit of taking the more sure fire prospect over just trusting our draft room to make a great pick anywhere? Considering practically taking the guess work out of the pick has to be heavily considered.

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

A bit of dream like logic here. When has all the first round selections ever been usable. Think the percentages are more like 50/50 on first round with it decreasing as reach round progresses. You actually out loud contemplated why every round one pick could possibly be a bust. News flash: happens every year….all the time. Doesn’t have to be a crap no talent draft. It’s just plainly called The Draft.

  RBs have the least considered value league wide than any position(not specialties like P and long snapper). Most of the best franchise level RBs don’t even go until round two. If you take a RB round one he better be considered the elite beast! Heck I feel that way about round two RB. I’d much rather just pay Sanders 7 mil and continue with him being our RB given breathers by his friends occasionally than invest a first round pick to step backwards into a committee backfield. If he’s round one….and sharing the load with Scott we really screwed up. Round one RB better dominate the backfield touches. Just my two cents in that subject.

Agree.. not worth the investment.  RB is a sizzle position, not a steak.  Flash name etc.   Look at SF dominating running game without the name RB. Even now the other guys are running it more than CMC.  

We have other needs.

3 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

A bit of dream like logic here. When has all the first round selections ever been usable. Think the percentages are more like 50/50 on first round with it decreasing as reach round progresses. You actually out loud contemplated why every round one pick could possibly be a bust. News flash: happens every year….all the time. Doesn’t have to be a crap no talent draft. It’s just plainly called The Draft.

  RBs have the least considered value league wide than any position(not specialties like P and long snapper). Most of the best franchise level RBs don’t even go until round two. If you take a RB round one he better be considered the elite beast! Heck I feel that way about round two RB. I’d much rather just pay Sanders 7 mil and continue with him being our RB given breathers by his friends occasionally than invest a first round pick to step backwards into a committee backfield. If he’s round one….and sharing the load with Scott we really screwed up. Round one RB better dominate the backfield touches. Just my two cents in that subject.

IDK why I took you off ignore. LOL I have no words for this BS. I never said round 1/s were all STUDS did I???  I said they were usable. Isn't pick 31 in round 1 close enough to round 2 for you???? OK lets trade back 32 to 33. Feel better???

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

I have been forced to back off making what I consider obvious assumptions around here. So we all can recognize the benefit of taking the more sure fire prospect over just trusting our draft room to make a great pick anywhere? Considering practically taking the guess work out of the pick has to be heavily considered.

Yea..look at recent drafts.  Picks have been higher, team traded up on the clock for specific target..targets. people like these drafts.  Compared to Reagor,  Dillard, Barnett...etc.  Haven't you been paying attention? 

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

IDK why I took you off ignore. LOL I have no words for this BS. I never said round 1/s were all STUDS did I???  I said they were usable. Isn't pick 31 in round 1 close enough to round 2 for you???? OK lets trade back 32 to 33. Feel better???

Love that idea to trade back a couple spots...not taking RB there though.   

7 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

RBs have the least considered value league wide than any position

Then why do you want to pay Sanders 8 million???

Today is Thursday.   Not going to assume everyone on here agrees.. lol

4 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Yea..look at recent drafts.  Picks have been higher, team traded up on the clock for specific target..targets. people like these drafts.  Compared to Reagor,  Dillard, Barnett...etc.  Haven't you been paying attention? 

Love that idea to trade back a couple spots...not taking RB there though.   

As I said if we can't re-sign Sanders to a decent deal I would have no issue taking 1. I will use the 8 million saved for a FA elsewhere and a RB is good for 4-5 more years on rook pay

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Then why do you want to pay Sanders 8 million???

Come on now...obvious?  That's his boy.   He needs to be right.  Regardless if it's a bad business decision.  Imagine Gainwell still here but no Sanders?  Comedy gold Jerry!

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

As I said if we can't re-sign Sanders to a decent deal I would have no issue taking 1. I will use the 8 million saved for a FA elsewhere

Me too...plus I'll use the draft pick elsewhere too.   We can get the other 2 RBs after the draft. ..2017 style. They will want to come run behind our OL next to an excellent running QB.  They won't cost much. 

1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

Come on now...obvious?  That's his boy.   He needs to be right.  Regardless if it's a bad business decision.  Imagine Gainwell still here but no Sanders?  Comedy gold Jerry!

IDK how long did we miss Shady going away? 

1 hour ago, joemas6 said:

Again...my point, what negative impact has he had over the last 2 years? Which game did he matter?

And the other point....it's 5 feet net average away from being a top punter. 

Don't give me PFF when talking about a punter.  I just showed the new guy had a worse net...but was ranked 14th.   How does a guy with a worse net get ranked 17 slots higher.    Should tell you PFF for punting probably isn't the way to go.

But we can win a SB now with this new punter.... so you should be more confident now

I think PFF at punting is probably one of their more accurate assessments. No surprise we completely disagree again. But did our P shanks under playoff pressure seal our doom last year? I don’t think so. But doesn’t mean it never could. I also acknowledge how we’ve done such a fantastic job avoiding punting in the first place this year being the fifth least P team we’ve covered for that deficiency well. I also think his injury made us a better team. So my confidence did rise that tiny bit by upgrading our 32nd ranked P. Think Covey can cover for our former P strength of being a good place kick holder. Actually adds a return man in the mix at the position creating enormous potential for fake opportunities. Win/win…get well soon Sippos…just not before the parade.

2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Me too...plus I'll use the draft pick elsewhere too.   We can get the other 2 RBs after the draft. ..2017 style. They will want to come run behind our OL next to an excellent running QB.  They won't cost much. 

All possibilities are still up for me at this point. If Gibbs is the BPA,I would have NP if Sanders is gone(maybe Scott goes also)

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

I think PFF at punting is probably one of their more accurate assessments. No surprise we completely disagree again. But did our P shanks under playoff pressure seal our doom last year? I don’t think so. But doesn’t mean it never could. I also acknowledge how we’ve done such a fantastic job avoiding punting in the first place this year being the fifth least P team we’ve covered for that deficiency well. I also think his injury made us a better team. So my confidence did rise that tiny bit by upgrading our 32nd ranked P. Think Covey can cover for our former P strength of being a good place kick holder. Actually adds a return man in the mix at the position creating enormous potential for fake opportunities. Win/win…get well soon Sippos…just not before the parade.

I believe the new punter... with the worse actual results in his punting ...also holds. 

It's an upgrade in PPF...just not in actual results.   But hey....it improves our team...because even though the injured guy never made a major mistake....the possibility was always there?  The new guy is guaranteed not to screw up....according to PFF.

5 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Me too...plus I'll use the draft pick elsewhere too.   We can get the other 2 RBs after the draft. ..2017 style. They will want to come run behind our OL next to an excellent running QB.  They won't cost much. 

True we COULD,but having a RB locked in for 4-5 years avoids the series of 1 year plug and plays. Just depends who is out there and what we do with Sanders/Scott,so too early for me to take a RB off the list and we're going to have to pay Hurts now

3 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

All possibilities are still up for me at this point. If Gibbs is the BPA,I would have NP if Sanders is gone(maybe Scott goes also)

No need for flash RB.  Jacobs great season for the Raiders..what's the impact on the record?

RB doesn't impact the game like before..  not worth the investment early 

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

True we COULD,but having a RB locked in for 4-5 years avoids the series of 1 year plug and plays. Just depends who is out there and what we do with Sanders/Scott,so too early for me to take a RB off the list and we're going to have to pay Hurts now

Yes...Gainwell locked in for 4 years...didn't need to be drafted early.  I'm ok shuffling and not locking everyone in..at RB.  Rather lock down other spots 

So who replaced Shady?

I'm watching a football game...I see a guy punt for 42 yards and a fair catch.  The next guy punts 41 yards and fair catch.

PFF has the 2nd guy ranked 14th...and the first guy ranked 32?    

That makes sense???

3 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Yes...Gainwell locked in for 4 years...didn't need to be drafted early.  I'm ok shuffling and not locking everyone in..at RB.  Rather lock down other spots 

I would have NP with Gibbs,Sermon,Gainwell and a vet addition if Sanders and Scott go away. Like it or not we still need some semblance of talent there and IDK that Gains is the guy and we haven't seen Sermon at all,so who knows

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

So who replaced Shady?

Another high priced free agent.  That was a bust.   The success came with the committee of the lower investment guys.  I'll stick to that approach. 

28 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

When did I say we can't win in the playoffs?   My point was the running QB struggles in the playoffs when teams look to sellout in stopping it. 

I've been a " let's see what happens,  let the season play out from the start "

Too many factors...did those other running QBs have the WR weapons we do?   How does Siri and the coaching game plan and adjust?   Does Hurts look to pass more?  Who knows.

The opponents matter too.  This is where we differ.  Dallas and Minnesota,  I have a much lower opinion than you.   And Dallas can win the matchup...but if forced to beat Chicago, Saints and Giants..  I don't see our team losing.   

My issue is Tampa and SF.   But those teams have lost a QB, Deebo hurt and Tampa just sucks now.   So I'm going to absolutely think it's a failure not to win the NFC.

But that playoffs are the way we could lose...to probably only SF.   I can't see us losing to Chicago, NY or Saints....that's pathetic. 

You went on many rants labeling Hurts a Running QB. You went on several rants of how a running QB can’t win in the postseason. So that’s when you said that "it will be totally different in the playoffs when teams realize Hurts runs and focus on stopping that.” "Hurts is a running QB.” "Running QBs don’t have success in the playoffs.”

 But I’m perfectly fine with you changing your opinion now. You just let us know what version you take now. I know it’s a tough area for you…not being in hindsight and all. We’ll get your ‘real’ opinion once somebody has a parade. Then you will find some clarity on your thoughts.