2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Nope.  Belichek played his starters.  Reid played his starters... look around the league, it is not a coach's MO to not play players in PS game #2.  Sirianni didn't play them at all.  That's an outlier, not the norm.

As for the last line... I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Sirianni to run an 'intense' practice any time before Game 1.   This team is deathly afraid of injuries.  They aren't tackling.  They are running short practices.   I don't expect them to ramp that up leading up to Game 1.  They should have been ramping up for last night and the next PS game, then ramping down a bit leading up to the first game, to them ramp up again.  This team is soft.

There is no "MO" for preseason game 2, since there's never been a preseason with only 3 games the last few decades.

Sure they're afraid of injuries, all HCs are, Jets just lost two starters in practice. It's a balance, and no one knows what the right balance is, all HCs play it by ear.

There's no "right way" to run preseason, I've yet to see a study that shows one approach is superior to another.

We don't know how Sirianni is going to approach this week, or the two weeks between the last exhibition game and the first game of the season. And we don't know how the team is going to respond - but I can remember seasons with intense training camps and slow starts, so that's no guaranteed solution either.

When Reid took over in 1999, he ran probably the most intense TC the Eagles have ever had, trying to whip a losing team into shape:

First four games:

Arizona (6-10) L 24-25

TB (11-5) L 5-19

@ Buffalo (11-5) L 0-26

@ NYG (7-9) L 15-16

 

7 minutes ago, Khani1 said:

No, your words were "why can't we draft a receiver who can simply catch"....dude hasn't played a down yet, wait a few games to make a stupid statement like this.

Yeah those were my words. And your point is, Mrs Smith? 

3 minutes ago, Godfather said:

I agree. It's a new era. College kids can market themselves and make money without any consequences now. But that shirt is damn ugly

The shirt sucks. Maybe he’s an attention w****, but that example is a really stupid one. 

Careful everyone don't incur the wrath of Khani Smith

Just now, greend said:

Yeah those were my words. And your point is, Mrs Smith? 

To go along with his strong route-running ability, Smith also has extremely reliable hands. In fact, he has a career drop rate of just 2.9% which is the lowest of any receiver in the 2021 NFL Draft

Do you need me to translate that for you Mrs. Wentz?

4 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Such a lame take.  Until satellite TV, you could only watch a couple games a week.  I have been watching football since 1988, so this will be my 33rd year.  I had NFL ticket for years, and with multiple ways to stream games, I can watch all games.  I would be willing to bet that I have watched more football than you.  You may have watched more Eagles football than me if you lived in the local market before you could watch out of market games, but total football, I bet I have watched way more and its not even close.

Were you the one who said Reid didn’t develop McNabb?

7 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

I know everyone loves Shanahan and all but I believe he might be over rated somewhat.  

1 winning season out of 4 and he's a great coach?  Maybe a great offensive coach and play caller but great HC?  Not so sure.  Let's see how he does with Saleh now gone and a new DC.

3 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Were you the one who said Reid didn’t develop McNabb?

Nope.  I said Reid does not have a history of developing a bunch of QB's.  And McNabb, most of his seasons his numbers hovered around his average.  He had a spike in 2004 with TO, and a spike in 2009, but he really did not progress over his career.  He was pretty much the same guy at the end that he was at the beginning.

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Nope.  I said Reid does not have a history of developing a bunch of QB's.  And McNabb, most of his seasons his numbers hovered around his average.  He had a spike in 2004 with TO, and a spike in 2009, but he really did not progress over his career.  He was pretty much the same guy at the end that he was at the beginning.

Lol. Ok. 

3 minutes ago, Khani1 said:

To go along with his strong route-running ability, Smith also has extremely reliable hands. In fact, he has a career drop rate of just 2.9% which is the lowest of any receiver in the 2021 NFL Draft

Do you need me to translate that for you Mrs. Wentz?

Do our receivers regularly drop passes? Did Smith drop 2 passes last night? How many receivers have we drafted that struggle with dropped passes?  You are thick as a brick. And what does anything I have said have to do with Wentz?  

6 minutes ago, austinfan said:

There is no "MO" for preseason game 2, since there's never been a preseason with only 3 games the last few decades.

Sure they're afraid of injuries, all HCs are, Jets just lost two starters in practice. It's a balance, and no one knows what the right balance is, all HCs play it by ear.

There's no "right way" to run preseason, I've yet to see a study that shows one approach is superior to another.

We don't know how Sirianni is going to approach this week, or the two weeks between the last exhibition game and the first game of the season. And we don't know how the team is going to respond - but I can remember seasons with intense training camps and slow starts, so that's no guaranteed solution either.

When Reid took over in 1999, he ran probably the most intense TC the Eagles have ever had, trying to whip a losing team into shape:

First four games:

Arizona (6-10) L 24-25

TB (11-5) L 5-19

@ Buffalo (11-5) L 0-26

@ NYG (7-9) L 15-16

 

Hmmmm... a moment ago, there was an MO.  Now there's not.  You don't need to see a study, the general softness of practices of the Eagles and the injury results speak for themselves.  Weak, short practices sure seem to lead to a lot of injuries.  Super hard practices can too.  The Eagles are at an extreme... and generally, the extremes of a spectrum leads to problems.  

 

Not sure what your point about Reid is... Yes, in 1999, they were a TERRIBLE team.  His tough preseason was about setting up a culture of accountability and hard work.  Of course, they lost the first 4 games that year.  They were coming off a 3-13 season, had the worst record in the NFL in 1998, and they brought in Doug Pederson to start at QB.  They were a BAD team, but they were ready to compete in Game 1.   They nearly won that first game, if not for a drop by Brian Finneran.  And more importantly, they learned those lessons from that hard preseason in Year 1, and made the playoffs in Year 2.  

We'll see what a soft practice schedule does for this team both in Year 1 and Year 2.   My guess is, they will remain a soft team, even if they become a 'better team'.  Toughness can't just show up on Sundays.  It needs to be there every day of the week.

Just now, downundermike said:

Nope.  I said Reid does not have a history of developing a bunch of QB's.  And McNabb, most of his seasons his numbers hovered around his average.  He had a spike in 2004 with TO, and a spike in 2009, but he really did not progress over his career.  He was pretty much the same guy at the end that he was at the beginning.

Uh, not at all. Reid definitely turned McNabb into a WCO QB from a one read option QB, in 2003, after his thumb healed (two horrid starts before an early break then he was red hot), he put up similar numbers the rest of the season and the playoffs that he would the next season with TO.

However, after McNabb got injured in 2005, he was never the same. 4 solid season, including an adjustment to AR's shift from ball control to big play with the addition of DeSean in 2008, but his progress stagnated - how much was the injury, how much McNabb's stubbornness in refusing to work on his game?

1 minute ago, austinfan said:

Uh, not at all. Reid definitely turned McNabb into a WCO QB from a one read option QB, in 2003, after his thumb healed (two horrid starts before an early break then he was red hot), he put up similar numbers the rest of the season and the playoffs that he would the next season with TO.

However, after McNabb got injured in 2005, he was never the same. 4 solid season, including an adjustment to AR's shift from ball control to big play with the addition of DeSean in 2008, but his progress stagnated - how much was the injury, how much McNabb's stubbornness in refusing to work on his game?

He’s basing it off stats and not watching McNabb develop. That’s pretty clear. 

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Not sure what your point about Reid is... Yes, in 1999, they were a TERRIBLE team.  His tough preseason was about setting up a culture of accountability and hard work.  Of course, they lost the first 4 games that year.  They were coming off a 3-13 season, had the worst record in the NFL in 1998, and they brought in Doug Pederson to start at QB.  They were a BAD team, but they were ready to compete in Game 1.   They nearly won that first game, if not for a drop by Brian Finneran.  And more importantly, they learned those lessons from that hard preseason in Year 1, and made the playoffs in Year 2.  

We'll see what a soft practice schedule does for this team both in Year 1 and Year 2.   My guess is, they will remain a soft team, even if they become a 'better team'.  Toughness can't just show up on Sundays.  It needs to be there every day of the week.

Gee, so how do we judge Sirianni coming off a 4-11-1 season when their big offseason addition was Nelson? Didn't he inherit a terrible team?

Your take seems to be the dinosaur "macho man" take, hit 'till they drop. But players didn't come to camp in the same condition two decades ago, so a lot of a tough camp was weeding out those who didn't take the off season seriously (Hegamin). Now most players train year 'round, the money is too good to screw up.

We'll see how the team looks to start the season, but I'll withhold judgement until then.

5 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

He’s basing it off stats and not watching McNabb develop. That’s pretty clear. 

I watched every Eagles game McNabb played in.  He was the same guy his entire career.  It took TO and then DeSean Jackson for his play to spike, otherwise, he was always the same guy, killing worms and folding up like a house of cards in the playoffs.

3 minutes ago, Khani1 said:

Listen you moron, you were implying Smith, he was the receiver we drafted this year.  It's obvious you don't know anything about him and just made asinine comments.  Take the L on this one.  The more you try to prove your point, the dumber you look.  Smith is not known to have drop issues, I guess you have trouble reading.  You called me Mrs. Smith.  I don't turn into a fan girl and become butt buddies with players, as you did with Wentz.

see a therapist 

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

I watched every Eagles game McNabb played in.  He was the same guy his entire career.  It took TO and then DeSean Jackson for his play to spike, otherwise, he was always the same guy, killing worms and folding up like a house of cards in the playoffs.

You don’t remember early McNabb. If you actually watched. 

4 minutes ago, downundermike said:

I watched every Eagles game McNabb played in.  He was the same guy his entire career.  It took TO and then DeSean Jackson for his play to spike, otherwise, he was always the same guy, killing worms and folding up like a house of cards in the playoffs.

Can't have it both ways. If his career "spiked". That means he improved. And yes Stinkston and Trash were not very good weapons like at all

@greend  I just tried to send you a message but your box is full and it would not allow me to send it.  I apologize for that post.  I went too far.  It was uncalled for. 

1 minute ago, greend said:

Can't have it both ways. If his career "spiked". That means he improved. And yes Stinkston and Trash were not very good weapons like at all

Anyone who actually watched McNabb throughout his career knows he wasn’t the same player his entire career. It’s a ridiculous assertion. 

That doesn’t mean McNabb improved significantly on all areas or didn’t plateau in some, but Reid developed the hell out of a freeze option QB. 

3 minutes ago, greend said:

Can't have it both ways. If his career "spiked". That means he improved. And yes Stinkston and Trash were not very good weapons like at all

Yes, but I would call progressing carrying that over multiple years.  He got TO, his play spiked, and then he immediately regressed to his average without him.

7 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

You don’t remember early McNabb. If you actually watched. 

You mean the guy who his first two full seasons as a starter, who completed 58% of his passes, with 46 TD's and 25 ints.  Yes, I remember him, and he was always that same guy.  

As a comparison, if Josh Allen does what he did last year this year, that is called development.  wend from a 58% passer who took to many sacks, to a 70% passer that took less sacks.  

 

But lets not continue to beat this dead horse, we were talking about a complete lack of preparation, discipline and inspiration of the Eagles last night.  Supposedly winning two days of practice is meaningless when you get embarrassed man 1 through man 90 by the team you practiced against.

Pretty crusty in here this morning; last night in here was a great reminder of why I never come in during games.  You'd think the team had lost 4 starters to season-ending injuries last night .... or they'd lost a game that mattered at all.

Just now, austinfan said:

Gee, so how do we judge Sirianni coming off a 4-11-1 season when their big offseason addition was Nelson? Didn't he inherit a terrible team?

Your take seems to be the dinosaur "macho man" take, hit 'till they drop. But players didn't come to camp in the same condition two decades ago, so a lot of a tough camp was weeding out those who didn't take the off season seriously (Hegamin). Now most players train year 'round, the money is too good to screw up.

We'll see how the team looks to start the season, but I'll withhold judgement until then.

You must have missed the 'the extremes of a spectrum leads to problems'... and since I am criticizing the Eagles for being on one extreme, you have placed me at the other extreme.  (Welcome to the state of politics today.  I don't like one extreme position, so I must be on the other extreme.    Nope, big swing and a miss by you.). 

We will be judging this process of preparation with the results we see on the field.   There's no 'judgement' at this point, 'disappointment' and a sense of impending failure because of disagreement with the current plan.   

 

As to the 'training year round' assertion... yes, they train, they do NOT tackle or hit year round, and their bodies are not accustomed to it.  They need to do it in practice to be able to do it in games.  These first two preseason games have demonstrated a great deal of inability to tackle, which is kind of fundamental to being a quality defense.  Good defenses, by definition, are good at tackling.  Bad defenses, are bad at tackling.  And the ability to tackle is the easiest way to improve a defense.  The run defense has been woeful so far.   Hopefully they can find the magic switch to fix that in a couple weeks.  Right now, I am skeptical, and I blame an institutional philosophy for why that is the case.

 

4 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Yes, but I would call progressing carrying that over multiple years.  He got TO, his play spiked, and then he immediately regressed to his average without him.

You mean the guy who his first two full seasons as a starter, who completed 58% of his passes, with 46 TD's and 25 ints.  Yes, I remember him, and he was always that same guy.  

As a comparison, if Josh Allen does what he did last year this year, that is called development.  wend from a 58% passer who took to many sacks, to a 70% passer that took less sacks.  

 

But lets not continue to beat this dead horse, we were talking about a complete lack of preparation, discipline and inspiration of the Eagles last night.  Supposedly winning two days of practice is meaningless when you get embarrassed man 1 through man 90 by the team you practiced against.

Most of man 1-20 didn’t play. 

And stop relying on pro football reference to determine a player’s development. 

2 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

Pretty crusty in here this morning; last night in here was a great reminder of why I never come in during games.  You'd think the team had lost 4 starters to season-ending injuries last night .... or they'd lost a game that mattered at all.

It's not about the game mattering in the win loss column, it was the look of an unprepared, undisciplined, uninspired team that is concerning.  Man 1 through man 85 the Patriots dominated us.