Either way before the draft I’m more interested in our FO and staff situation. Been saying fire Howie it’s time need new blood in there. Would be interesting to see Lurie hire an actual football guy went from Banner to Howie.

New GM to me makes the call on the HC...

34 minutes ago, time2rock said:

Howie was just so focused on adding speed he completely neglected everything else that makes someone a really good football player.  Not saying Reagor isn't or won't become one, but it was clear to practically everyone that JJ >>> Reagor (even before what we know now ... I'm talking about April 23, 2020).  

Oh I agree!  If you took a poll from this EMB, I am fairly sure we would have had a much better draft than what they managed. JJ was concensus #1, although I liked Ruggs and Lamb more.

For 2 there was Mims and Chin available. If we drafted WR round 1 I would have to think Chin would have been the choice. Round 3 we could have gone for a Guard or best LB or even drafted Hurts if HR was so high on him. I am sure he would have been there..... Didn't Lawarence get picked later? Anyway. Just the first two would have made that draft a success regardless of what was done later.....

Interesting graphic showing our wr separation versus that of our opponents.

PHL - Receiver Separation vs. Opponents - Imgur

To me it shows the problem isn't with our wrs.

38 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Interesting graphic showing our wr separation versus that of our opponents.

PHL - Receiver Separation vs. Opponents - Imgur

To me it shows the problem isn't with our wrs.

   I cannot see the graphic from my work. Does this include Tight Ends? If so, it may be misleading as our TE's were open all day long......

33 minutes ago, stine said:

   I cannot see the graphic from my work. Does this include Tight Ends? If so, it may be misleading as our TE's were open all day long......

It goes game by game, so it obviously changes. But against the Seahawks, Ward and Reagor were generating more separation than Rodgers and Goedert.

But the most important point to me is that our receivers aren't getting covered much differently than we are covering opposing receivers. So the idea that we need guys to get more open than they are getting now is not substantiated by the facts.

2 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

 

No, I had JJ all the way

You can go to hell for lying the same as you can for stealing

2 hours ago, time2rock said:

Same here.  

Would you have been happy with taking BPA last year?  I know I would have.  

IDK BPA is all opinion isn't it?

44 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

You can go to hell for lying the same as you can for stealing

WHAT???? I was the FIRST GUY to target JJ for us(on this board). So stop lying. I had him for us despite the "OH WE GOTTA HAVE RUGGS" clan.Once we figured out we weren't getting Ruggs that's when the disagreement with me and Ham started lol. Ham was correct, we took Reagor

2 hours ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Split back up as in Howie and Joe Douglas??? They didn’t draft well either just saying 

https://www.phillyvoice.com/look-eagles-drafts-during-joe-douglas-era-philadelphia/amp/

 

Why are we re-hiring Joe Douglas? I'm not planning on that.What's behind me is not important

2 hours ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

You can’t draft that way... I had no issues with Jefferson as the pick but just drafting a guy who you think is better right now should not be the case... Looking at Barnett.

Sure he might be the most nfl ready but how much more room does he have to grow???

As for Reagor everyone I seen had Reagor around the late 1st didn’t really draft him out of range he wasn’t as NFL ready as Jefferson and the injury didn’t help him. 

IDK isn't your first draft pick a guy that should help you NOW? (and later?) I would never EVER assume a kid out of college has "peaked" in the NFL sense. If you want WIP's avoid round 1 altogether. My round 1,2 guys need to help my team in their first year (maybe not the first game though)

Just now, GreenbleedinNC said:

IDK isn't your first draft pick a guy that should help you NOW? (and later?) I would never EVER assume a kid out of college has "peaked" in the NFL sense. If you want WIP's avoid round 1 altogether. My round 1,2 guys need to help my team in their first(maybe no the first game though)

I think there are two schools of thought with this one bud. Some say your draft picks are for years 2 and beyond (if not 3 and beyond). Others say you want day one contributors from your first round picks. I guess a lot also depends on what position they play as to how long they need to find their feet.

2 hours ago, stine said:

Oh I agree!  If you took a poll from this EMB, I am fairly sure we would have had a much better draft than what they managed. JJ was concensus #1, although I liked Ruggs and Lamb more.

For 2 there was Mims and Chin available. If we drafted WR round 1 I would have to think Chin would have been the choice. Round 3 we could have gone for a Guard or best LB or even drafted Hurts if HR was so high on him. I am sure he would have been there..... Didn't Lawarence get picked later? Anyway. Just the first two would have made that draft a success regardless of what was done later.....

Aiyuk was also in that round 2 mix. 

15 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

I think there are two schools of thought with this one bud. Some say your draft picks are for years 2 and beyond (if not 3 and beyond). Others say you want day one contributors from your first round picks. I guess a lot also depends on what position they play as to how long they need to find their feet.

That could be true. I suppose it depends when you feel your starters need replaced. But if ALOT need replaced, I need guys NOW. Some are late bloomers that take time. For me, those are not my round 1 picks. I may do a 2(as we did with Jones which we wiffed on because he was NOT ready the following year) if I know I can rely on the guy I have there for 1 more season. So, I'm sure everyone has their opinions. Mine is my 1,2 guys contribute. That doesn't mean they have to replace my present starter, it means they need to show me why I drafted them. So this year,I was hoping for Reagor to CONTRIBUTE(not start necssarily). But,as we all know due to injury, he now has to step up

3 hours ago, jsb235 said:

John McMullen on Twitter: "When six teams put in a waiver claim on a player that’s a red flag indicating a lot of people think that guy can play. Howie Roseman and the #Eagles are on notice again with @PhillyWill11" / Twitter

I am not too concerned with releasing Parks, as I think he is what he is, a backup level safety. I do think he is better than Mills, who is severely overvalued by this team.

My hope is that the team uses the rest of the season to get a good look at some younger players in the secondary, as I would say that is the area of greatest need right now. If guys like Wallace, Jacquet, Epps and Arnold can show something, it changes the complexion of the next draft immensely.

On a related note, we can't put Maddox at outside corner against Valdes-Scantling. He just doesn't have the size to cover him. If there was ever a game to roll the dice with Jacquet, this is it.  

Mills coming on made Parks expendable. Gotta a couple young guys worth giving a shot too though.

2 hours ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Either way before the draft I’m more interested in our FO and staff situation. Been saying fire Howie it’s time need new blood in there. Would be interesting to see Lurie hire an actual football guy went from Banner to Howie.

New GM to me makes the call on the HC...

Been saying that for yrs. Without change in GM we will only get T-shirts.

4 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Mills coming on made Parks expendable. Gotta a couple young guys worth giving a shot too though.

We always release players who are "expendable" and they go on to have great/ solid games elsewhere

8 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

That could be true. I suppose it depends when you feel your starters need replaced. But if ALOT need replaced, I need guys NOW. Some are late bloomers that take time. For me, those are not my round 1 picks. I may do a 2(as we did with Jones which we wiffed on because he was NOT ready the following year) if I know I can rely on the guy I have there for 1 more season. So, I'm sure everyone has their opinions. Mine is my 1,2 guys contribute. That doesn't mean they have to replace my present starter, it means they need to show me why I drafted them

I think this is where this team now has a real issue. They won't have that many older guys to lean on and so they have no choice but to play the rookies. Now in some cases that'll be fine and game time will benefit the rookies but in some cases it could have a negative affect on them. 

Villanueva was expendable,Jones was expendable,Douglas was expendable(see a pattern here?)

2 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

I think this is where this team now has a real issue. They won't have that many older guys to lean on and so they have no choice but to play the rookies. Now in some cases that'll be fine and game time will benefit the rookies but in some cases it could have a negative affect on them. 

Yeah,that's in my "lack of planning and poor draft" file. That file takes up most of the room HAHAHA

3 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

We always release players who are "expendable" and they go on to have great/ solid games elsewhere

Mills proved he was the vet to keep. Now we replace Parks with the kid we targeted in the draft Arnold up off the practice squad. Epps has been in the system. I’d like to see Wallace involved more. Going forward...that’s what we are working with. Not all about whether Parks has more experience.

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Mills proved he was the vet to keep. Now we replace Parks with the kid we targeted in the draft Arnold up off the practice squad. Epps has been in the system. I’d like to see Wallace involved more. Going forward...that’s what we are working with. Not all about whether Parks has more experience.

Why do we need to lose him at all? Is there some star player we need a roster spot for? I'm sure he will go on to play well elsewhere just like all our other "expenadbles"

2 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Villanueva was expendable,Jones was expendable,Douglas was expendable(see a pattern here?)

Jones and Douglas are tough. We brought in a new Secondary Coach and he just had a few TC practices to judge things. Jones was mostly due to no durability. So that’s a whole other department to go after.

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Jones and Douglas are tough. We brought in a new Secondary Coach and he just had a few TC practices to judge things. Jones was mostly due to no durability. So that’s a whole other department to go after.

Yeah, I called Jones a WIFF, not becuase of the player,for the fact we were counting on him the following year and that didn't happen. So as I always say it's a fine line between patience and "coddling"

4 hours ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

IDK-who is responsible for keeping those players ON the field? Even if he has some bad picks,they are mostly pine riders,so I can't put that on Howie. I DO think that "/GM" needs to be split back up. But that is Luries decision. So, really it won't matter who we draft,or who we acquire of FA if we have the leagues biggest mash tent. Must be the water in Philly lol

Bad picks tend to be pine riders. I think Howie needs to leave the building. If he's around he'll find a way to get to where he has no business being, the draft room.

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Why are we re-hiring Joe Douglas? I'm not planning on that.What's behind me is not important

Did say rehire Joe I was just trying to get a sense of what you meant by split up the GM job and that would be the only time we did it.... Just saying that didn’t work out well either and Howie had final say