1 hour ago, joemas6 said:

Why would you want a finesse player at G?????  

If he's strong enough to play LT,he is strong enough to play LG.His"Finesse" as you put it could be used to stop Defensive stunts beside a potential brick wall In Mailata

1 hour ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Lane Johnson getting 2nd opinion on his ankle he could very well be done for the year 

UGH

4 minutes ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Didn’t say he couldn’t play G just don’t think he would be better then Semaulo or Herbig.

Think the better course of action is to let him compete for LT next year whoever loses is backup LT keep it simple 

We don;t know until we TRY it?? We try everyone else at places they dont belong.Moving over 1 spot shouldn't bug him as much as forcing him to play the right side

2 hours ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Yea he would play where you tell him doesn’t mean he will be good though....Terrible RT realistically best case scenario he is competition at LT and the backup LT if he loses .

Could try him at LG but don’t think he beats our Semaulo or Herbig.

RT we have Lane he isn’t losing and Driscoll should be the top RT backup 

He just had like 118 yards or so and a TD vs the Chiefs 

Chiefs outscore you,much like the Colts of the Manning era.KC secondary is not all that good (better than ours however).I'm glad Ruggs had ONE good game

9 minutes ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Didn’t say he couldn’t play G just don’t think he would be better then Semaulo or Herbig.

Think the better course of action is to let him compete for LT next year whoever loses is backup LT keep it simple 

Problem,if lane goes down(such as now) we seem to not have any viable BU's. Although they try,this team suffers when Lane is out.Howie would never admit that his first round pick is a BU and thus Dillard will play at LT no matter,that is why I suggested the move to G right NOW.Give the job to Mailiata.Although he has work to do,he has shown me more than Dillard,so I would make this move now.Dillard can play OG and still be Mailatas BU .At least he will be playing and justify us drafting him

12 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Chiefs outscore you,much like the Colts of the Manning era.KC secondary is not all that good (better than ours however).I'm glad Ruggs had ONE good game

He only played 3 games.... Jefferson has 2 good games in 5 I mean I’m just being fair in comparison... This looks like a great class of WRs not selling any of them short 

16 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

We don;t know until we TRY it?? We try everyone else at places they dont belong.Moving over 1 spot shouldn't bug him as much as forcing him to play the right side

When you read my post do you not see the I’d try him there parts or just dont read it 

1 hour ago, stine said:

  Should have traded him like I wanted before the draft.... Now he has no value and I doubt we even get a third round compensation for him.... What a waste.

Different mindset at the time.  They were about DeSean, Reagor getting added to the 2 TE offense and looking to put up points.   Still a fan favorite, look how many fans were saying to pay him to keep him happy...etc.  I don't know how much value he had though, due to the fact that the idea was he was valuable here getting a ton of targets in our system, and we would get rid of him due to $$$ ... so the new team was going to have to pay.  I don't think he is seen as a major weapon (ie speed or tackle breaking ability)   But more a reliable complimentary piece for a team.  IDK about a 3rd, maybe we could have gotten that.  I think we can still get a 5th with the right team, if we make the move before the trade deadline.  But I will be surprised to see him go before the season ends. 

2 hours ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Um yes at times he did look bad. Sure there are some mitigating circumstances I'm not going to argue that... But what we saw at times last night is what we have seen a lot throughout his career! There's no getting away from that despite the reasons or excuses. 

Again... last night I saw Russell Wilson struggle .... here is your key phrase.... " AT TIMES"     AT Times happens every game for QBs......    My point... regression is something that you see over time.   There is no way you are seeing " regression from Wentz the last 3 games since the 6 quarters he put up vs Wash and the Rams.   What we are seeing, he's looking better as well as the offense... due to the continuity of the players who have been in the last 2 games.     Regardless of talent level, it's obvious to anyone watching how Wentz did not have much confidence in the WRs at the start of the season.  Guys in and out not practicing with him etc.  The stability of the lineup the last 2 weeks.... is a big reason why I'm all for keeping the young guys in there and just adding Reagor and Goedert when they get back.   I'm done with DeSean, Alshon and Ertz.   None of them will be here next year, let the young guys get better and let my QB keep working with the same guys... when you see a difference of the 6 quarters from 2nd half of Washington / Rams game ..where we put up 17 points (AT HOME). ... to the last 6 quarters where we put up 45 points (ON THE ROAD)     like 3 times the difference.   That's not " regression"   that's improvement.      Regardless of " AT TIMES"   which you see with every QB during certain plays in games.    WE need to be honest with ourselves.... every game is a new one, every drive, every play.   Foles can stink for a whole game or for a few in a row... he makes one play... " see, we should have kept him"    Wentz can make a ton of plays and play well.... one mistake "  see he stinks"    Overall, I'd like to see how many QBs could handle our situation where guys have been coming in and out etc.   Not sure any QB has it and more difficult... which I think only makes him better.... similar to how 2016 with those scrub WRs prepared him to make the huge jump once he had adequate weapons around him in 2017.    Really just let this group grow together and add maybe one piece (maybe a RB and blocking TE)  I have no reason to think Wentz can't play at 2017 level again once the team around him is back to that level.   This time, lets due it with a younger crew, so it could sustain!!!   

1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

Again... last night I saw Russell Wilson struggle .... here is your key phrase.... " AT TIMES"     AT Times happens every game for QBs...... 

Wentz struggles more than at times though. Yesterday was at times but there's been so so many at times this year so far. 

2 hours ago, jsb235 said:

 

Second, on the Hightower throw to the end zone, it looked like he was late. I think if the ball was delivered earlier it's a score. He did make a good throw and Hightower maybe should have caught it, but he was running out of room. Ideally that's a ball that hits him in stride.

 

 

I was thinking a junior high WR could have made that catch.... like 60 yards away, you should be able to track the ball, he totally misjudged it.  He was running sideways and had plenty of room to make the catch before he hit the sideline.    That's a bad play by a WR.  Gotta make that catch.  No ifs and or butts.  WE see the final split second of the screenshot, the WR sees it coming the whole way, he was ahead of the coverage too, so nothing in his way.  No excuses on that one.   

2 hours ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Didn’t say he couldn’t play G just don’t think he would be better then Semaulo or Herbig.

Think the better course of action is to let him compete for LT next year whoever loses is backup LT keep it simple 

I said he couldn't play G ... I'll take credit for being 1000% in on that one.   I don't want a finesse player who didn't run block much to play G for me.  No thanks.  He is either LT or he gets traded.  

2 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

If he's strong enough to play LT,he is strong enough to play LG.His"Finesse" as you put it could be used to stop Defensive stunts beside a potential brick wall In Mailata

 

But his issue is his strength.   His footwork was why he was drafted high as a LT prospect.  He's a tackle.  

29 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Wentz struggles more than at times though. Yesterday was at times but there's been so so many at times this year so far. 

Right... so yesterday was not a " regression" was it.  You look at the 5 games so far.... where was he the worst?    Was it the last few games?    That would be egression.   Forget past years ... we are talking this year, his play with this year's team.   It's a team game, it should be obvious that he isn't going to play as well or consistent as 2017 when he had the better team around him.  Forget that level for now.  We have to focus on 2020 Wentz, the one that isn't going to be elite.  The one that is going to struggle each game because he needs to make plays in order to win, and he has to do them in an environment where ... he gets hit half the time... 20 hits on 40 drop backs yesterday.    He will have to have to do it with bad WR play like Hightower missing an easy TD.   2017 he was able to dominate because he didn't have these issues around him.  He had time, he had guys open by a lot, he still missed throws and fumbled etc.   The issue you see now is that if he misses a play it's magnified because he isn't getting as many chances to make them like before.   

But in no way is he " regressing"  from the start of the year.

 

 

35 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Wentz struggles more than at times though. Yesterday was at times but there's been so so many at times this year so far. 

So my question.   As Wentz plays Sunday vs Baltimore..... are we still worried about his play vs the Rams... ir are we going to judge it by just his play vs Baltimore?   Because ... he can play perfect for 8 games in a row... and you can still bring up the Rams game and say " it's more than "at times"   

Both his elite 2017 season, and all his past bad games... should go in the toilet when looking to judge him going forward.   I want to see him play with these young guys, when we know that he has to play with these young guys, and he practices with them.  No more musical chairs or a roster, and then we can better judge.  

This stat is incredible.

In rewatching the game, I was dumbstruck by how many times we had them in a good spot after first and second down, only to see them convert on third down. Every one of their drives could have been a punt or a field goal instead of a touchdown had we made a key stop.

The problem is that the Steelers offense isn't that good. And neither was the Niners offense. In fact the only halfway decent offense we faced was the Rams, and they certainly aren't great. We just make average offenses and players look awesome.

  

This play kind of describes our day.

All we had to do was to cover the receivers for a minimal amount of time and Ben never makes that throw. The pass rush is on the verge of getting to him. But Claypool wins right at the LOS for an easy first down and, due to Epps' missed tackle, a touchdown.

My solution for the defense next year? Find a better CB2 in the draft and put Maddox at safety. Pray that Taylor can turn into something and draft a LB as well. Our back seven has way too many UDFAs, castoffs and sixth- and seventh-rounders to be any good. We just need an infusion of talent.

 

I've seen people saying we need to fire Schwartz and hire Quinn. Really? Because their D was so great?

3 hours ago, joemas6 said:

I said he couldn't play G ... I'll take credit for being 1000% in on that one.   I don't want a finesse player who didn't run block much to play G for me.  No thanks.  He is either LT or he gets traded.  

I mean my eyes he is competing either way at LT next year so won’t be playing G anyway and odds are if he loses then yes we would look to trade especially depending on Driscolls development 

2 hours ago, Asg 15 said:

I've seen people saying we need to fire Schwartz and hire Quinn. Really? Because their D was so great?

I think we have some guys on our staff who could step into the role. Our DB coach in particular, Marquand Manuel, is a guy I would consider

It's not hard to see how this defense could have been really good. Jones or Douglas at CB2 instead of Mills. LJ Fort and Singleton/Edwards at LB instead of Gerry and Riley. Jenkins instead of Epps at SS. But it was clearly Schwartz who wanted those guys gone.

So in this case it's pretty clear who the problem is.

What is sad is that every CB we cut last year - Jones, Douglas and Darby - has a higher rating from PFF than the guys we kept - Mills, Maddox and James, and all of them are higher or about the same as Slay, who is getting paid more than all of them combined. Now, PFF isn't a perfect way to measure performance, but it does indicate that we have a coaching problem and not a talent problem.

It also is a positive sign that Manuel is coaching his players well, since they obviously have a good skill set when they leave here.  

6 hours ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

He only played 3 games.... Jefferson has 2 good games in 5 I mean I’m just being fair in comparison... This looks like a great class of WRs not selling any of them short 

When you read my post do you not see the I’d try him there parts or just dont read it 

You cover everything,so it's hard to pin down your stance cause you say "try him" then no put this guy here,that guy there.so if I misunderstood,my apologies.As I said let him practice there,you'll be able to tell if he can cope or not(I mean it 's PRACTICE).It's not like we have anything to lose now lol. Joe already has him labelled.I'm not doing that yet.Joe could be right, I'd just like to find out,that's all.We've tried other players at other spots,so really we have nothing to lose. Noone thought Mailata was ready to play either,but he did. We know Dillard is not a right side guy(how? because we TRIED IT),so just lets him give it a shot.You never know if you don't try.Lots of college tackles become NFL G's

4 hours ago, joemas6 said:

Again... last night I saw Russell Wilson struggle .... here is your key phrase.... " AT TIMES"     AT Times happens every game for QBs......    My point... regression is something that you see over time.   There is no way you are seeing " regression from Wentz the last 3 games since the 6 quarters he put up vs Wash and the Rams.   What we are seeing, he's looking better as well as the offense... due to the continuity of the players who have been in the last 2 games.     Regardless of talent level, it's obvious to anyone watching how Wentz did not have much confidence in the WRs at the start of the season.  Guys in and out not practicing with him etc.  The stability of the lineup the last 2 weeks.... is a big reason why I'm all for keeping the young guys in there and just adding Reagor and Goedert when they get back.   I'm done with DeSean, Alshon and Ertz.   None of them will be here next year, let the young guys get better and let my QB keep working with the same guys... when you see a difference of the 6 quarters from 2nd half of Washington / Rams game ..where we put up 17 points (AT HOME). ... to the last 6 quarters where we put up 45 points (ON THE ROAD)     like 3 times the difference.   That's not " regression"   that's improvement.      Regardless of " AT TIMES"   which you see with every QB during certain plays in games.    WE need to be honest with ourselves.... every game is a new one, every drive, every play.   Foles can stink for a whole game or for a few in a row... he makes one play... " see, we should have kept him"    Wentz can make a ton of plays and play well.... one mistake "  see he stinks"    Overall, I'd like to see how many QBs could handle our situation where guys have been coming in and out etc.   Not sure any QB has it and more difficult... which I think only makes him better.... similar to how 2016 with those scrub WRs prepared him to make the huge jump once he had adequate weapons around him in 2017.    Really just let this group grow together and add maybe one piece (maybe a RB and blocking TE)  I have no reason to think Wentz can't play at 2017 level again once the team around him is back to that level.   This time, lets due it with a younger crew, so it could sustain!!!   

Disagree some(and agree with some) -7 picks in 4 games is regressing IMO.Now you an blame whomever, the O line,lack of WR's, bad play calls, the Easter bunny, but "seasoned" QB's throw those balls away and don't put their D on the field in 2 minutes.Now, he HAS made some great plays,and some bonehead plays. I was expecting a little more consistency.

4 hours ago, joemas6 said:

But his issue is his strength.   His footwork was why he was drafted high as a LT prospect.  He's a tackle.  

And Butler is a WR. IDK Joe we never tried him at G.After all the BS moving players everywhere wha;'s one more try?.If he's a BU tackle,so be it,but we wont know that by guessing.At this point I'm willing to try anything

3 hours ago, joemas6 said:

Right... so yesterday was not a " regression" was it.  You look at the 5 games so far.... where was he the worst?    Was it the last few games?    That would be egression.   Forget past years ... we are talking this year, his play with this year's team.   It's a team game, it should be obvious that he isn't going to play as well or consistent as 2017 when he had the better team around him.  Forget that level for now.  We have to focus on 2020 Wentz, the one that isn't going to be elite.  The one that is going to struggle each game because he needs to make plays in order to win, and he has to do them in an environment where ... he gets hit half the time... 20 hits on 40 drop backs yesterday.    He will have to have to do it with bad WR play like Hightower missing an easy TD.   2017 he was able to dominate because he didn't have these issues around him.  He had time, he had guys open by a lot, he still missed throws and fumbled etc.   The issue you see now is that if he misses a play it's magnified because he isn't getting as many chances to make them like before.   

But in no way is he " regressing"  from the start of the year.

 

 

2 picks,2 picks,2 picks,1 pick. Thats regression in my book. Thats what rookie 3rd stringers do

33 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

I think we have some guys on our staff who could step into the role. Our DB coach in particular, Marquand Manuel, is a guy I would consider

It's not hard to see how this defense could have been really good. Jones or Douglas at CB2 instead of Mills. LJ Fort and Singleton/Edwards at LB instead of Gerry and Riley. Jenkins instead of Epps at SS. But it was clearly Schwartz who wanted those guys gone.

So in this case it's pretty clear who the problem is.

What is sad is that every CB we cut last year - Jones, Douglas and Darby - has a higher rating from PFF than the guys we kept - Mills, Maddox and James, and all of them are higher or about the same as Slay, who is getting paid more than all of them combined. Now, PFF isn't a perfect way to measure performance, but it does indicate that we have a coaching problem and not a talent problem.

It also is a positive sign that Manuel is coaching his players well, since they obviously have a good skill set when they leave here.  

First step,get better players.We always ignore CB and LB and expect Schwartz to pull rabbits out of hats. Alot of times he does.Seems fairly easy,give Schwartz something to work with.it's all been about "getting Wentz weapons" well we've done that for 4 years and ignored the secondary and scrape barrels at the last second and the weapons we got Wentz can't stay on the field

I think as a whole(and I know I am) we are all frustrated at the "great team" we SHOULD have at this point.If we can't keep players on the field we will remain at .500. We all point fingers,make suggestions(I make mocks and am guilty of both lol) ,in the hopes we can return to a SB.We all have differing views about how to build a team,what players we need where,who we should trade and what we should get and Howie sucks,but Howie is great,Schwartz sucks,but Schwartz is great,Wentz sucks,but Wentz is great, so we cover all aspects here.I have 2 goals really,and how you choose to make that happen is personal opinion. 1) replace/weed out/flat out fire whomever you have to on the S&C staff.2) find consistent players. IDC how bad they are,they can be replaced,but replace them with better CONSISTENT players. Execution depends on this.If we lack consistency,we won't execute.Without that,there will be WOW plays and OMG plays and in my view we are seeing that now.We ride the emotional rollercoaster because we have little consistent play,because we can't keep the same 22 on the field.We DO have some that are.now we need to weed out the ones who aren't, pro or rook,no matter,play the same game every week.We have seen Ertz shine without WR's before,so what's the issue now-no Goedert? SMH. IMO no consistency. Ertz must be pulling his hair out if he wants to move to another team because his stats are not worth his pay this year.For me those 2 points come first and I'm sure all have different views.GO!!!!!

14 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

First step,get better players.We always ignore CB and LB and expect Schwartz to pull rabbits out of hats.

Under Schwartz we have brought in McLeod, Jenkins, Jackson, Bradham, Darby, Slay and Hargrave, some of whom had a direct connection to him. In the last four drafts we have picked eight defensive players in the first four rounds.

We have consistently gotten production from picks on offense - Wentz, Seumalo, Goedert, Pryor, Mailata, Sanders, Vaitai - while not getting much of anything from those on defense. We have seen UDFAs or castoffs from other teams do well on offense - Ward, Scott, Fulgham, Foles - while having very few guys improve on defense after they get here.

It's not a "we don't give Schwartz enough talent" problem, it's a "Schwartz wrecks everything he touches" problem, as evidenced by the fact that players get better once they leave here.