2 hours ago, joemas6 said:

I want to try it so then you can stop after you realize it's not going to work because it;s not rugby.  I'm all for it and for Dillard to get bullied at OG so then we can move on to the next one... maybe Wentz can replace Elliot at kicker, couldn;t be much worse.  We won't know until we try it.  

Yeah JJ is helping them win a ton up there.  

Right lmao,you can never accept someone who has a different view.I just want the line SET and done and stop moving guys around.If JP can play ROG he can play LOG .As far as your "Wentz can try kicking" thats not even close to the same thing. Once again we tried Hurts MULTIPLE times and how is that working out? Maybe Hurts can kick too!!!! So why did we "try" the Philly special? According to your thinking,that would never have worked either so why try it? Just saying Mailata on a tackle eligible NOONE would expect,but let's forget that like you would have not tried the Philly Special.It's ONE play I suggested and you are making it sound like I want it to be in the playbook.Forget I mentioned it at all-happy now????

2 hours ago, joemas6 said:

Right but then you keep missing the we would have Pryor matchup withe Lawrence... is that what is best for Wentz... what you keep harping on?  Do you want Lawrence lining up all game long vs Pryor?   In life you need to not always go by the book and understand the moment.  A weak player vs Lawrence could kill the offense.   

It's the match up game   OL and DBs need to be solid without a hole..... but flip it and one WR or one DL can cause the mismatch that totally changes the game.  I don't the coahc on hte field at LG and put in the training camp attitude on the left side... while Pryor is getting beat like a turnstile and Wentz gets his ass kicked ... because of all that great theory.  Put the best guy in front of Lawrence... to me, if its at RT .. it's Mailata over Pryor or Peters.   You can switch it back next week.  

We can't switch linemen every game.There should be(in theory) starters that start and play the same position.Of course you can rotate BU's at times,but there is zero way Wentz will get any type of continuity,if we keep changing the players around him for every game. Jack of all trades,master of none will not work

2 hours ago, joemas6 said:

So if you spill water out of a bottle... do you pick up the bottle before it's done spilling or just let it go?   That's why you worry about cap now, I'm sure both Alshon and Ertz have been on the trade block and they both knew it.  I'm in Ham's camp, i'm not worried about the picks we get in return as much as the extra cap space we would get.  But I want to see the young guys play anyway.  I don't think Ertz helps you win games anymore... and Alshon is basically what Fulgham gives you.  For here, I don't see any value they bring as far as help winning now.  Certainly not in the future.  I can't imagine a team not giving a late round pick for either if it were a contender.  I would think Chicago for Alshon with Foles ... Ertz in Arizona ... those would be nice fits for teams that would look to make some noise this year.  

IDK the cap would be pro rated and we are 1/2 way through the season,so I think it's rather pointless to talk about cap savings that are 50%(or less).and dropping with every game played and we won't really know the contenders until late in the season.We can guess,but we don't know.Most teams that are contenders are paying out loot for the players they have,hard to fathom them adding to their cap with the season 1/2 way done unless there is an extreme emergency.Add in the fact they are injured and I don't see anyone lining up for them.If anyone wanted Ertz,they would have cut a deal earlier than this before he went out IMO. I'm sure anything is possible under the right conditions,but I think it's a long shot,so I wont be counting on it.I heard Njoku in Cleveland is unhappy,I could see Ertz going there if they cut bait with him(maybe a player for player trade would work?)

2 hours ago, joemas6 said:

I want to try it so then you can stop after you realize it's not going to work because it;s not rugby.  I'm all for it and for Dillard to get bullied at OG so then we can move on to the next one... maybe Wentz can replace Elliot at kicker, couldn;t be much worse.  We won't know until we try it.  

Yeah JJ is helping them win a ton up there.  

BTW I don't care if the Vikes are winning or losing, JJ is putting up stats in some games we can only dream about,that's what matters to me

Off the board awhile HF

44 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Right lmao,you can never accept someone who has a different view.I just want the line SET and done and stop moving guys around.If JP can play ROG he can play LOG .As far as your "Wentz can try kicking" thats not even close to the same thing. Once again we tried Hurts MULTIPLE times and how is that working out? Maybe Hurts can kick too!!!! So why did we "try" the Philly special? According to your thinking,that would never have worked either so why try it? Just saying Mailata on a tackle eligible NOONE would expect,but let's forget that like you would have not tried the Philly Special.It's ONE play I suggested and you are making it sound like I want it to be in the playbook.Forget I mentioned it at all-happy now????

What does the Philly special have to do with anything?    But I am confused.   Tackle eligible... usually that's the OL lined up on the end of the line and gets a pass from the QB?   As I said, I'm good with that.   Are you saying put him in the backfield????  Like a running back?  I'd be more for him or an OL used as a FB in that case, but if you want to give him the ball once... lets do it so we can end the discussion.  Dillard ay G, I don't why you don't see it's going against logic Dude is built like a OT.. he's a finesse OT... tall and skinny type... the scouting report is he struggles vs the bull rush and he didn't run block much in college.    On top of that Semaulo has looked really good and Herbig has looked pretty good.  Brooks you can argue is the best G in the league... although I like the guy in Indy.   On top of that we are thin at OT .. so deep at G, thin at OT... a dude built perfectly for OT, and not good for G... struggles at what you want your G to be good at, but naturally good footwork for a T.    I mean... sure, lets try it, or we go into the season ... with Brooks, Semaulo with Herbig as the backup.... and a Lane, Mailata, Dillard group at OT.  3 T and 3 G instead of 4 G and 2 T?   

IDK... I think it would be awesome if we could say out future bookends were Dillard and Mailata... would solve a lot.  My guess is they try that for sure, with the key having Mailata being able to play swing for a season or two until Lane retires or they let him go.  That would be ideal, and at this point, they don't have to hand the job to Dillard if Mailata develops, they can play the best one there while Lane is still here.  IDK.. but probably if Mailata wins, and Driscol shows he can play, they may trade Dillard.  Or maybe Driscol starts conversion to C?  Who knows?  

56 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

We can't switch linemen every game.There should be(in theory) starters that start and play the same position.Of course you can rotate BU's at times,but there is zero way Wentz will get any type of continuity,if we keep changing the players around him for every game. Jack of all trades,master of none will not work

But if it works with Mailata at RT, why switch.  Don;t you think it makes sense to start with the lineup that would be best for the first game that you can play Peters?   

25 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

But if it works with Mailata at RT, why switch.  Don;t you think it makes sense to start with the lineup that would be best for the first game that you can play Peters?   

But they'll have to switch once Lane returns so that would be another switch?

The Time to Trade Ertz was before or during the last draft. That would have given you the best bang for your buck. I was told that was bad thinking because they could get another great season out of him and the best time to trade was after this season. Well, now everyone is wishing they traded him 3  or 4 weeks ago? For a fourth rounder? Seriously? Whatever. We might have gotten a 3rd round compensation if he walks, but now we may be lucky to get a 4th or 5th.... Wasted resource again.

   As for the O-line, I am in for whatever gives Wentz the most time to toss the rock. If it means we put Peters at a guard position with Malaita at Tackle, so be it. Yes, Guard is much different than Tackle, but Peters has Practiced there so I am sure he can handle it. What I am not sure about is if that gives Wentz more time. Peters is not a rookie, so I am sure he can play Guard or Tackle on either side and do a better job than our 2nd or third string players. What I do not want to see is Malaita on the bench when he appears to be our best LT in the locker room. Just stupid coaching IMO. I heard Johnson is playing Sunday, so this is a real possibility now....

8 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Ravens and GB don't need a TE that badly.Both teams have decent enough TE's(I have them in fantasy).My default homers could use him(Carolina)

Why worry NOW about the cap before the season is over? If we were serious about the cap thing he would have been gone before this.Now that he is hurt,I don't see that happening.Another Alshon situation. 

A screw up by the front office you mean...on both fronts. That was the point

5 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

IDK the cap would be pro rated and we are 1/2 way through the season,so I think it's rather pointless to talk about cap savings that are 50%(or less).and dropping with every game played and we won't really know the contenders until late in the season.We can guess,but we don't know.Most teams that are contenders are paying out loot for the players they have,hard to fathom them adding to their cap with the season 1/2 way done unless there is an extreme emergency.Add in the fact they are injured and I don't see anyone lining up for them.If anyone wanted Ertz,they would have cut a deal earlier than this before he went out IMO. I'm sure anything is possible under the right conditions,but I think it's a long shot,so I wont be counting on it.I heard Njoku in Cleveland is unhappy,I could see Ertz going there if they cut bait with him(maybe a player for player trade would work?)

Except....they have confirmed that at least two teams were making offers for Ertz

16 minutes ago, stine said:

The Time to Trade Ertz was before or during the last draft. That would have given you the best bang for your buck. I was told that was bad thinking because they could get another great season out of him and the best time to trade was after this season. Well, now everyone is wishing they traded him 3  or 4 weeks ago? For a fourth rounder? Seriously? Whatever. We might have gotten a 3rd round compensation if he walks, but now we may be lucky to get a 4th or 5th.... Wasted resource again.

   As for the O-line, I am in for whatever gives Wentz the most time to toss the rock. If it means we put Peters at a guard position with Malaita at Tackle, so be it. Yes, Guard is much different than Tackle, but Peters has Practiced there so I am sure he can handle it. What I am not sure about is if that gives Wentz more time. Peters is not a rookie, so I am sure he can play Guard or Tackle on either side and do a better job than our 2nd or third string players. What I do not want to see is Malaita on the bench when he appears to be our best LT in the locker room. Just stupid coaching IMO. I heard Johnson is playing Sunday, so this is a real possibility now....

Seemed like we were the only two that actually saw this coming with Ertz. Fans get so attached to some of these players they can’t understand the business decisions. 

Just doesn’t feel like Lane can give us much this season. His injury from last season was clearly badly mismanaged. You can talk about all these different positions for Peters but HE controls where he plays. He is coming back to play LT...or not coming back. Guy has too much power for a player.

14 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Just doesn’t feel like Lane can give us much this season. His injury from last season was clearly badly mismanaged. You can talk about all these different positions for Peters but HE controls where he plays. He is coming back to play LT...or not coming back. Guy has too much power for a player.

I don't know Ham. Fact is Peters should never be able to dictate where he plays. Everywhere you hear how much a team player he is, but when you actually need him to make a sacrifice, he says no? Seriously....? How good would the line be with Malaita at LT, Lane at Rt Peters at either Guard and the next best at the other guard? Guessing much better with Malaita not playing at all.....

5 hours ago, joemas6 said:

What does the Philly special have to do with anything?    But I am confused.   Tackle eligible... usually that's the OL lined up on the end of the line and gets a pass from the QB?   As I said, I'm good with that.   Are you saying put him in the backfield????  Like a running back?  I'd be more for him or an OL used as a FB in that case, but if you want to give him the ball once... lets do it so we can end the discussion.  Dillard ay G, I don't why you don't see it's going against logic Dude is built like a OT.. he's a finesse OT... tall and skinny type... the scouting report is he struggles vs the bull rush and he didn't run block much in college.    On top of that Semaulo has looked really good and Herbig has looked pretty good.  Brooks you can argue is the best G in the league... although I like the guy in Indy.   On top of that we are thin at OT .. so deep at G, thin at OT... a dude built perfectly for OT, and not good for G... struggles at what you want your G to be good at, but naturally good footwork for a T.    I mean... sure, lets try it, or we go into the season ... with Brooks, Semaulo with Herbig as the backup.... and a Lane, Mailata, Dillard group at OT.  3 T and 3 G instead of 4 G and 2 T?   

IDK... I think it would be awesome if we could say out future bookends were Dillard and Mailata... would solve a lot.  My guess is they try that for sure, with the key having Mailata being able to play swing for a season or two until Lane retires or they let him go.  That would be ideal, and at this point, they don't have to hand the job to Dillard if Mailata develops, they can play the best one there while Lane is still here.  IDK.. but probably if Mailata wins, and Driscol shows he can play, they may trade Dillard.  Or maybe Driscol starts conversion to C?  Who knows?  

  Not sure why you two are arguing. Both are saying it is OK to try it on the goal line and that seems to be where GBFL wants to try it....  Whether he runs it or tries to catch a pass doesn't really bother me. Teams have tried this many times in the past with O-Tackles and D-Tackles. This is nothing new. Malaita is a freak and most likely has good hands. I am sure he could power his way 1 yard up the field if given the ball. Not sure what the downside would be here. You can't worry about injuries for anything or why play the game?

2 hours ago, stine said:

I don't know Ham. Fact is Peters should never be able to dictate where he plays. Everywhere you hear how much a team player he is, but when you actually need him to make a sacrifice, he says no? Seriously....? How good would the line be with Malaita at LT, Lane at Rt Peters at either Guard and the next best at the other guard? Guessing much better with Malaita not playing at all.....

Shouldn’t have been able to dictate getting paid more to move positions either. I can’t think of another player situation like it ever. But it happened. Everybody knew he was brought back to play G and be the backup T. I don’t think Peters is even a very good player anymore. 

From what I've been reading and listening to, it sounds like both Reagor and Edwards will be a full go on Sunday with no restrictions. So I would expect Singleton to be the three-down LB and Edwards to play the nickel and Riley to be in base.

At wr, I would expect Fulgham and Ward to be on the field most of the time, with Reagor and Hightower splitting time. I would also expect some 10 personnel with all four on the field.

I kind of doubt that Goedert and Lane will play. Lane seems more likely than Goedert. If Lane does play, I think Peters plays RG and Mailata moves to LT, but that is my guess as no one seems to know for sure.

Maddox is CB2, Mills is the SS. If reports are true that they are trying to trade Parks, I am not sure how much they will play him with Epps and Wallace healthy. Epps seems to have leapfrogged him on the depth chart as the third safety.

It will be interesting to see what they do with NRC, who was caught jogging on the Jones run. Certainly he deserves to be benched even without that lack of effort, but that should be the final nail in the coffin. But James and LeBlanc are banged up, so maybe he gets a reprieve. He would be the guy I would cut and not Parks, but no one is asking me.

Malik Jackson seems like he will be a game time decision. My guess is that they call up Williams since they are out of options with McGill, and they might want to see what they have in him. Ostman might also get a call up since Avery is hurt and Curry is out with an illness.

They are short on roster spots with so many guys coming back. Edwards, Ford, Peters and Reagor seem certain to be activated. That means they have to cut two guys, or three if Goedert plays. Croom seems to be the guy who goes if Goedert is activated. Parks seems to be the odd man out right now in the secondary. Butler would be my third cut.

 

 

2 hours ago, stine said:

I don't know Ham. Fact is Peters should never be able to dictate where he plays. Everywhere you hear how much a team player he is, but when you actually need him to make a sacrifice, he says no? Seriously....? How good would the line be with Malaita at LT, Lane at Rt Peters at either Guard and the next best at the other guard? Guessing much better with Malaita not playing at all.....

Yeah,this is what I have been trying to say.Peters at LOG,for me,makes the most sense.He is used to the left side and knows alot of opponents players on that side having played against them  andhe could help mailata IN GAME with adjustments and those little things a probowler knows.Let the battle be for ROG.We will have to replace JP next year(maybe but what if he succeeds at LOG? He could squeeze another year out,even if in a BU role),but for me the battle THIS year should be for ROG,we can worry about LOG next year,but everyone calls me crazy and says that won't work,or we should not try it.So whatever,but Stine sees it nearly the same way I do

2 hours ago, stine said:

  Not sure why you two are arguing. Both are saying it is OK to try it on the goal line and that seems to be where GBFL wants to try it....  Whether he runs it or tries to catch a pass doesn't really bother me. Teams have tried this many times in the past with O-Tackles and D-Tackles. This is nothing new. Malaita is a freak and most likely has good hands. I am sure he could power his way 1 yard up the field if given the ball. Not sure what the downside would be here. You can't worry about injuries for anything or why play the game?

Yeah,once again,getting bashed for a "differing view".After watching him toss 300 pound guys like they weighed 85 pounds,my thoughts were "hey let's put a smile on this guys face and let him truck some people" and I want a poster of that smile in my man cave.if we tried it once successfully,you now can call him eligible at a later time and NOT USE him.But now teams have to set a D for him at the GL(called a decoy if I recall)

31 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Shouldn’t have been able to dictate getting paid more to move positions either. I can’t think of another player situation like it ever. But it happened. Everybody knew he was brought back to play G and be the backup T. I don’t think Peters is even a very good player anymore. 

Yep,he used his leverage on us when we were on desperation blvd.Signed as a ROG,nailed us and got LOT money,so my point is (do not ask) TELL HIM,you are playing LOG.Sounds like a fair compromise to me.I have already stated why he should play the left side,not gonna keep hammering it

No issue at the goal line GBFL. I would not want to use him on a regular basis though. Put in a play or two for a goal line situation is fine by me...

15 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

From what I've been reading and listening to, it sounds like both Reagor and Edwards will be a full go on Sunday with no restrictions. So I would expect Singleton to be the three-down LB and Edwards to play the nickel and Riley to be in base.

At wr, I would expect Fulgham and Ward to be on the field most of the time, with Reagor and Hightower splitting time. I would also expect some 10 personnel with all four on the field.

I kind of doubt that Goedert and Lane will play. Lane seems more likely than Goedert. If Lane does play, I think Peters plays RG and Mailata moves to LT, but that is my guess as no one seems to know for sure.

Maddox is CB2, Mills is the SS. If reports are true that they are trying to trade Parks, I am not sure how much they will play him with Epps and Wallace healthy. Epps seems to have leapfrogged him on the depth chart as the third safety.

It will be interesting to see what they do with NRC, who was caught jogging on the Jones run. Certainly he deserves to be benched even without that lack of effort, but that should be the final nail in the coffin. But James and LeBlanc are banged up, so maybe he gets a reprieve. He would be the guy I would cut and not Parks, but no one is asking me.

Malik Jackson seems like he will be a game time decision. My guess is that they call up Williams since they are out of options with McGill, and they might want to see what they have in him. Ostman might also get a call up since Avery is hurt and Curry is out with an illness.

They are short on roster spots with so many guys coming back. Edwards, Ford, Peters and Reagor seem certain to be activated. That means they have to cut two guys, or three if Goedert plays. Croom seems to be the guy who goes if Goedert is activated. Parks seems to be the odd man out right now in the secondary. Butler would be my third cut.

 

 

Although we have Hightower(who I had for us in that draft, and like his development to date),he is no match for Reagor on speed.I think Wentz will be able to hit this kid and keep the deep threat on the table ALL game.Although I fought Ham over the Reagor/JJ draft mess,I have to go with who we have and the incredible speed he has should,go a ,long way

6 minutes ago, stine said:

No issue at the goal line GBFL. I would not want to use him on a regular basis though. Put in a play or two for a goal line situation is fine by me...

Yep,that all I was saying.I referred to the Philly special which Joe says "no relation to that".OH.but there IS.It's about practicing a play(ONE!!) or 2 that can turn a game around./So,at the right time(like the Philly special),I can see Mailata as our "fridge".Sorry but GL stopping this guy from the 2.It's not like we are a well oiled machine,so let's try a few things "off the given path".if it works,now you have a decoy play you can use anytime you feel like it.if it doesn't it's ONE lost play(like we don't have those now?)

Conversation

 

 

 

 

Tim McManus

 

@Tim_McManus

 

Doug Pederson on sitting/moving Mailata: "I go back to Nelson Agholor a few years ago and an opportunity to kind of see big picture himself...I love where Jordan is at, I love where his growth's at, but...if Jason Peters starts at LT it allows Jordan to see big picture as well."

8 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Although we have Hightower(who I had for us in that draft, and like his development to date),he is no match for Reagor on speed.

I think using a split between Hightower and Reagor is more about Reagor's conditioning and getting integrated back into the offense more than it is a larger commentary on them as football players for the long run.