1 minute ago, stine said:

  Not sure why we even brought him here to be honest. It is not like we were a few away from competing for a division title. Talk on the radio is that he will be a solid locker room presence to help our younger coaching staff. I guess that could be it. Still, would have much rather we spent on a younger potential talent that could help out 2-3 years from now.

 

Is it a sign that they expect to trade a DE?

Kerrigan it’s been said is a good guy. But more of a lead by example than vocal leader. We already have Brandon Graham and Fletcher Cox on the Dline for veteran presence.

Stine, a few away from a division title? Wow, what respect you have for the crappy teams in Our division.

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Is it a sign that they expect to trade a DE?

  Trade who? Barnett? So we have Kerrigan for one year, trade away Barnett and have another hole to fill in 2022.... Wonderful

3 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Stine, a few away from a division title? Wow, what respect you have for the crappy teams in Our division.

LOL, it is not so much about respect for the other teams, but the lack of respect for ours! Adding Kerrigan may boost us to 6 wins. You think that will compete with the other teams? I see your opinion is different that you feel we will win more and I respect that. My opinion is much less generous.

59 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Kerrigan it’s been said is a good guy. But more of a lead by example than vocal leader. We already have Brandon Graham and Fletcher Cox on the Dline for veteran presence.

I see him playing the Chris Long role

We already  had Cox and Graham then too

1 hour ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Kerrigan it’s been said is a good guy. But more of a lead by example than vocal leader. We already have Brandon Graham and Fletcher Cox on the Dline for veteran presence.

This year the Eagles will be the only team in the division not to win 9 games.   

1 hour ago, stine said:

  Trade who? Barnett? So we have Kerrigan for one year, trade away Barnett and have another hole to fill in 2022.... Wonderful

Most likely Barnett walks after this year.  So the hole was going to be there anyway.

22 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

I see him playing the Chris Long role

We already  had Cox and Graham then too

Long was already a winner.   Coming to play for a title.   The idea is OK.   But the team is not in the same position as when Long was acquired 4 years ago.  The big thing.... guys like Cox and Graham were in their primes in 2017.   

The move makes much less sense now.

2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Long was already a winner.   Coming to play for a title.   The idea is OK.   But the team is not in the same position as when Long was acquired 4 years ago.  The big thing.... guys like Cox and Graham were in their primes in 2017.   

The move makes much less sense now.

 

2 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Long was already a winner.   Coming to play for a title.   The idea is OK.   But the team is not in the same position as when Long was acquired 4 years ago.  The big thing.... guys like Cox and Graham were in their primes in 2017.   

The move makes much less sense now.

Disargree (imagine that)  Kerrigan is a high motor guy and great in the locker room. Like Graham.

If he can teach the young players to be professionals it's worth a 1 year contract.

Anyone know the contract terms?

11 hours ago, joemas6 said:

Bradham... 5 years ago a 2 year $7 mil deal wasn't all that cheap.   You knew you had 3 NFL level starters there.   Above average group for sure.     

 

That was cheap Joe 3.5m for a Lb  what’s the avg. in 2016 for a Lb 8-10m. I don’t dispute we had good Lbs but we haven’t changed from then till now in how we addressed the position only real outlier was Kendricks. 
 

Difference I see is the guys we got could play Hicks came in and start as you stated vs Taylor. 
Bradham signed cheap but could play over say Zach Brown who we signed.

1 hour ago, stine said:

LOL, it is not so much about respect for the other teams, but the lack of respect for ours! Adding Kerrigan may boost us to 6 wins. You think that will compete with the other teams? I see your opinion is different that you feel we will win more and I respect that. My opinion is much less generous.

Considering we have one of the easiest schedule think people are setting the bar really low because we want high picks. 
 

Toughest stretch for us is first 6 weeks and it probably will be ugly maybe 1-3 wins in that stretch. But that that the rest are extremely beatable teams Chargers(weak D), Denver no O, Jets were the #2 pick for a reason, lions and raiders aren’t great team. The NFC East which isn’t a strong division. Last the Saints who don’t have a QB 

7 to 9 wins seems about right for this team this year.

9 minutes ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Considering we have one of the easiest schedule think people are setting the bar really low because we want high picks. 
 

Toughest stretch for us is first 6 weeks and it probably will be ugly maybe 1-3 wins in that stretch. But that that the rest are extremely beatable teams Chargers(weak D), Denver no O, Jets were the #2 pick for a reason, lions and raiders aren’t great team. The NFC East which isn’t a strong division. Last the Saints who don’t have a QB 

7 to 9 wins seems about right for this team this year.

  If you say so. I disagree. We have no Defensive backs to cover the WR's in our division. D-Line is a year older. LB's are weak. Offense depends mostly on Hurts. IF he can perform at a high level, we possibly can score 24-34 per game. I have doubts he will perform at a average level, let alone a high level. Not happy with our RB's after Sanders. I see 3-6 wins.

31 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

 

Disargree (imagine that)  Kerrigan is a high motor guy and great in the locker room. Like Graham.

If he can teach the young players to be professionals it's worth a 1 year contract.

Anyone know the contract terms?

So what about Kelce, Graham, Cox, Lane, Brooks, McCloud, Slay....  this team needed a veteran????    One who hasn't won anything in his career?  

I mean why listen to all the guys I just mentioned... Kerrigan obviously is the guy to listen to ?????  

He brings a vet presence to the DL?  Not enough guys over 30 there?  

Again, Long was already a winner, coming to win another title and play with guys in their primes. Much different situation than Kerrigan coming here now. 

1 minute ago, joemas6 said:

So what about Kelce, Graham, Cox, Lane, Brooks, McCloud, Slay....  this team needed a veteran????    One who hasn't won anything in his career?  

I mean why listen to all the guys I just mentioned... Kerrigan obviously is the guy to listen to ?????  

He brings a vet presence to the DL?  Not enough guys over 30 there?  

Again, Long was already a winner, coming to win another title and play with guys in their primes. Much different situation than Kerrigan coming here now. 

What are the terms of the contract? Is it a no cut contract?

Do you hink you're gonna get anyone better at this point?  A 4 man DE rotation is about right.

9 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

So what about Kelce, Graham, Cox, Lane, Brooks, McCloud, Slay....  this team needed a veteran????    One who hasn't won anything in his career?  

I mean why listen to all the guys I just mentioned... Kerrigan obviously is the guy to listen to ?????  

He brings a vet presence to the DL?  Not enough guys over 30 there?  

Again, Long was already a winner, coming to win another title and play with guys in their primes. Much different situation than Kerrigan coming here now. 

You say Long was already a winner as if you think only 1 player makes a winning team. I know you're smarter than that

Look at the Redskins of the past 10 years. Reggie White wouldn't have made that team a winner. 

22 minutes ago, stine said:

  If you say so. I disagree. We have no Defensive backs to cover the WR's in our division. D-Line is a year older. LB's are weak. Offense depends mostly on Hurts. IF he can perform at a high level, we possibly can score 24-34 per game. I have doubts he will perform at a average level, let alone a high level. Not happy with our RB's after Sanders. I see 3-6 wins.

DL is a year older but was near the top in sacks last year not imaging they just completely fall off... DBs Slay is still a very good CB and got some good S as well. Also a new scheme that likely aids the DBs not Schwartz leave them alone on an island coverage. Defense is actually the least of my concerns think we can field an above avg. unit. 
 

The real question for me is the offense and as you said it will go with Hurts. I’m expecting a lower scoring offense that relies on ball control 

32 minutes ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

That was cheap Joe 3.5m for a Lb  what’s the avg. in 2016 for a Lb 8-10m. I don’t dispute we had good Lbs but we haven’t changed from then till now in how we addressed the position only real outlier was Kendricks. 
 

Difference I see is the guys we got could play Hicks came in and start as you stated vs Taylor. 
Bradham signed cheap but could play over say Zach Brown who we signed.

I disagree.  The average for a LBs is not even 8 to 10 mil now.   It wasn't a cheap signing at all, it was a smart signing for the specific player who played in the system.   Who came in to play with 2 LBs who were already starters.  And decent starters.  

The LB position constantly changing from year to year... that's the before and after 2016-17.    We are we starting now in establishing 3 guys that can play....

1. At starter level

2. Fitting at all the positions 

3.  With the idea they can build something together?  

This is Omar Geather, the scrubby Matthews bro, Chris Gogong, Jamar Chaney type stuff.

I'm all for building on the lines and prioritizing certain spots, but in building the 2016-17 teams they filled our starters, which included LBs and both safety spots , then they went to get the depth.    

It's year 1 here again, so we don't know the plan yet.  But I'm hoping they learned from doing it right the last time.  You can't suck in spots really badly while focusing on depth at other spots.  In 2017,you could argue that our CBs were the weak spot.   But they were young and hungry and fairly decent... and had above average players all around them at DL, LB and S.    

I'm hoping they take similar approach going forward. You gotta get the LBs and S play back up, and decent play at CB before throwing money and picks at backup DL.   On offense, same thing.  Gotta get starters at every skill spot before focusing on 3rd string OL.  They had a nice core in 2016, got the missing pieces at WR and some depth on the lines and QB and were all set the following year. We aren't going anywhere until they take the same approach.  

7 to 9 wins and what I’m expecting this year but the big thing is which young guys step up. 
 

We will learn about Hurts and if we need a new QB 

We will learn what we have at WR and TE the OL got some young guys coming in. Do we have a LT?

Defense Barnett/Sweat big years for these guys... Got a pair of rook DTs can they show something. Interesting setup at Lb two rookies both hybrid guys Avery changing spots Taylor year two... Still think we could see Kerrigan play the same spot at Avery/Turner. 

CB- Maddox seems like a fit for this scheme can he rebound his career... Zech was a guy we were extremely high on can he show something as a rookie. 
 

S- got some young guys to looks at. 
 

This year I don’t have super high expectations for this team it’s more about learning what we have in younger guys 

Just now, joemas6 said:

disagree.  The average for a LBs is not even 8 to 10 mil now.   It wasn't a cheap signing at all, it was a smart signing for the specific player who played in the system.   Who came in to play with 2 LBs who were already starters.  And decent starters.  

I disagree it was a cheap signing Joe lmao 😂 tell me what was the avg. starting Lb salary then in 2016 bet it was more then Bradham 

Kuechly 2015 signed a 5 year 60m extension that’s 12m a year for the top tier LB. yes you can lay the contract out so the numbers are different but that’s top tier LB money in 2015.

middle tier then you would assume is around 6-8m

Bradham at 3.5m yea cheap 

5 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Who came in to play with 2 LBs who were already starters.  And decent starters.  

I don’t dispute we had good Lbs. But again looking at what we spent Kendricks is the outlier. Back in 2012 we spent a 2nd 

2015 we spent a 3rd on Hick we also spent a 3rd on Taylor what’s the difference between the two one actually can play it’s not the capital we spent. 
 

Bradham 3.5m a year Wilson making what around 3m what’s going to make the difference in these signing of Wilson can play. 
 

Again point I’m making we haven’t address Lb differently from then till now it’s the success we had getting guys draft pick cheap FA vs recently 

17 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

You say Long was already a winner as if you think only 1 player makes a winning team. I know you're smarter than that

Look at the Redskins of the past 10 years. Reggie White wouldn't have made that team a winner. 

I say Chris Long was already a winner ... who came to Philly as a veteran player ... on a team that was primed to win, playing next to a bunch of DL that were in their prime.  

Ryan Kerrigan never won.    The Eagles are not primed to win like they were in 2017.   And their DL is already older with their best 2 guys ages 30 and 33, not ages 26 and 29 like they were when Long signed. 

4 guys at DE sounds right... Graham, Barnett, Sweat and the rookie.   Kerrigan makes 5, I don't see it anywhere near the situation that Long came into.  Other than maybe just playing part time and rushing the passer on 3rd down.  Other than that, I don't see anything else as similar between either the stage of the team or the off the field stuff/ need for a veteran. 

2 hours ago, stine said:

LOL, it is not so much about respect for the other teams, but the lack of respect for ours! Adding Kerrigan may boost us to 6 wins. You think that will compete with the other teams? I see your opinion is different that you feel we will win more and I respect that. My opinion is much less generous.

6 wins is what I am expecting. 7 would give me hope lol

20 minutes ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

DL is a year older but was near the top in sacks last year not imaging they just completely fall off... DBs Slay is still a very good CB and got some good S as well. Also a new scheme that likely aids the DBs not Schwartz leave them alone on an island coverage. Defense is actually the least of my concerns think we can field an above avg. unit. 
 

The real question for me is the offense and as you said it will go with Hurts. I’m expecting a lower scoring offense that relies on ball control 

   Well, Cox and Graham being a year older hurts, also what everyone seems to forget is the other teams in our division will be better also. Dallas has stacked up on Defensive players in the draft and FA. Giants and Washington also added players. Did we do more? I guess that is the big question. Plus we have a big question mark for the coaching staff. We all have no clue how they will do. Just way too many questions and not enough answers for me. To assume we will win 7-9 games is optimistic when you take Hurts/New Coaches into account. Most likely it falls somewhere between our two projections. Like 6-7