4 minutes ago, downundermike said:

He said there’s no evidence to support a negative reaction.
 

I think what I posted is definitely evidence to support people having a negative reaction.

You repeatedly confuse speculation with evidence...  a full study done of all teams during, lets say, the first 3 weeks of the season, and of how they conducted their preseason, and what their results were during the 1st three weeks...  that's evidence...

2 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Is McPhearson playing tonight? I'd like to watch him (I haven't been able to see any of the games live yet)

He pretty much has to play...  not sure his roster spot is a given...

21 minutes ago, downundermike said:

 

 

I see that. So Carson doesn’t see the negative yards addressed in the yards passing in that chart.  So do those negative yards only show for him in the sack category or do they also show up like in college against his overall rushing total?  

8 minutes ago, Veejer said:

I'm calling a big old fat STRAW MAN here...  no one, at any time, has suggested not playing in the preseason will STOP A PLAYER FROM GETTING HURT during the season...  what it did was insure they didn't get hurt BEFORE the season started...

Dillard, Quez Watkins, will parks, the three biggest names who started the season on IR last year, obviously not counting guys on IR from previous season injuries, all got hurt in training camp. None of them got hurt in a preseason game.  Are we going to cancel training camp next?

3 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I see that. So Carson doesn’t see the negative yards addressed in the yards passing in that chart.  So do those negative yards only show for him in the sack category or do they also show up like in college against his overall rushing total?  

They do not. Sack yards in the NFL only count against team passing yards.

12 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I see that. So Carson doesn’t see the negative yards addressed in the yards passing in that chart.  So do those negative yards only show for him in the sack category or do they also show up like in college against his overall rushing total?  

No...  they're only deducted from the team's overall offensive passing yardage total... and, hence, form the teams total offensive yards...

6 minutes ago, Veejer said:

He pretty much has to play...  not sure his roster spot is a given...

Why ??  Camp reports seem mostly positive.

6 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Dillard, Quez Watkins, will parks, the three biggest names who started the season on IR last year, obviously not counting guys on IR from previous season injuries, all got hurt in training camp. None of them got hurt in a preseason game.  Are we going to cancel training camp next?

 

I have absolutely no idea what point you're addressing here....  players who didn't play in the pre-season can OBVIOUSLY get hurt during the season...  no one would argue with that...

 

 

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Why ??  Camp reports seem mostly positive.

He got eaten alive in game one, from what I saw...  haven't heard much about him lately...

33 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Shows how much college ball I watch.  I see numbers and yards are separate on NFL.com.  Are you sure they don’t count against rushing yards?  I mean if Hurts keeps the ball and is running it but gets tackled for a loss, is it only recorded with sack yards?  Makes for the stats being subjective or skewed. 

If Hurts drops back to pass and scrambles around and runs towards the line of scrimmage for a one yard loss, it is simply counted as a sack for one yard. It does not count towards his rushing totals at all.

But there's a caveat. If it's a designed run where Hurts runs a bootleg and is stopped a yard behind the line, THAT would count as a rushing play with a loss of one yard. The problem is that sometimes a play is hard to determine for the official stat-keepers. So that's why it's tough to keep stats on a game-by-game basis and have it all balance out at the end of the year. Because often through the course of a season, the league will change a rushing loss into a sack. Or visa versa. I run into this problem every year because the official boxscores after a game can get changed later on, and the stats I keep for all 32 teams will have slight adjustments that have to be made the following summer. 

22 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

What a silly take. You actually want to SEE him play for the first time in nearly two years and base your judgment on his actual performance, rather than on random tweets over the course of two seasons which has somehow become defining gospel to Eagles fans all over the world?

I don't know what to expect from Dillard, but if he plays tonight I hope he plays great. But I'm convinced that there are many, many Eagles fans who want to see him suck just so that they can continue to complain about Howie's decisions. It makes them feel better inside to just be constantly negative.

There are some that's vision is so tainted they will see what they want to see.  

26 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

As I've said all along, you and others with this view may end up being totally right. I have no delusions of what might be. But I am willing to wait and see what effect this new way of doing things has on the team. I'm just as intrigued to see how it affects the Rams, as I think they have a more talented roster than we do. 

I think the biggest concern will be those little soft tissue injuries....hamstrings, calves tightening, things that make guys miss a series or quarter, but nothing that makes them miss extended time. It disrupts things obviously if guys are shuffling around because of it. I would hope if that ends up happening, they would correlate it to the lack of physicality in pre-season. I fear you may be right, that they may just ignore the connection. 

Spot on. I suspect some rust but I am not sure playing in the third PS game would have cured that.  I do worry about the lack of tackling in the defense.

24 minutes ago, RLC said:

Let's be honest here. The season is not won/lost based on playing starters in pre-season. We'll go as far as Hurts can take us.

Losing a game or two because you are behind the 8 ball can certainly "win or lose the season" for you. Hurts is one of the players that could be hurt by it

8 minutes ago, Veejer said:

He got eaten alive in game one, from what I saw...  haven't heard much about him lately...

Does that really matter if he looked good in joint practices ??

Less Filling!

30 minutes ago, Casey @ Bat said:

Kinda like "I’ll just take a 5th or 6th rd pick for Ertz” camp. Screw that , why give away a good player? Last time I checked we could use a few of those.

Amen, brother. It drives me crazy. Sure, I understand that there are salary cap implications, but I'm a believer in principle of keeping your good players. I wish we had done that at quarterback, but here we are.

28 minutes ago, RLC said:

Let's be honest here. The season is not won/lost based on playing starters in pre-season. We'll go as far as Hurts can take us.

6 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Spot on. I suspect some rust but I am not sure playing in the third PS game would have cured that.  I do worry about the lack of tackling in the defense.

And it was on full display against the Pats last Thursday

1 hour ago, DeathByEagle said:

Honestly that goes for the Oline, recs, TEs, DBs as well. The Hbs, and LBs are the only starters that have had some play time really. The Dline is one of the easier transitions from preseason to reg season so Im not very concerned with them. 

Im expecting rust from all of the offense and at least the DBs on defense, which in turn will make Hurt look bad as well. Oline breaks down from not being in sync, Recs run wrong or bad routes etc. However, I'm not putting Hurts on an excuse train. He will look rusty as well by his own mistakes. 

Im not expecting to see much of anything till weeks 4 or 5. Weeks 1-3/4 will give them there preseason reps they needed now and missed. 

How many reps do you think starters get in preseason games? Maybe 40 over 3 games? Then two weeks until you play an actual game.

If it takes 4 weeks to catch up, you need new players. More like 1Q to shake off the rust, because most of what you do to prepare for the season is practice, not exhibition games where everyone is going at 3/4 speed.

20 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Is McPhearson playing tonight? I'd like to watch him (I haven't been able to see any of the games live yet)

I hope so.  I hope he is starting in place of Nelson but that may be James if his foot is healthy enough. May be Jacquet. I think McPhearson is set as the fourth CB but that the battle for fifth is between James, Jacquet and Scott.   All need reps. Frankly, I would rather see them than Slay, Nelson and Maddox tonight. 

So did they make an official announcement that the starters arent going to play tonight?   

10 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

There are some that's vision is so tainted they will see what they want to see.  

Didn't Paul Simon say something like that?

36 minutes ago, Veejer said:

There's basically three ways you can view the 1st few weeks:

1) I think insuring all are starters will be healthy will put us ahead of the curve

2) Not sure how the coach's handling of the preseason will pan out, so I guess we'll have to see where we are on the curve to judge

3) I expect us to come out behind the curve the first few weeks

None of them are unrealistic... 1 or 3 could happen, and 2 is looking back at the evidence...  so, how would you label them otherwise?

I wouldn't say that it's negative at all, personally. I think it's pretty reasonable to anticipate the team looking even more sluggish than usual when their young QB has only a few starts and hasn't seen game action in over a month.

1 hour ago, downundermike said:

Bolded contributors this year.  Less than half, and with the cap and the money they will want based on performance, I expect Goedert and Barnett to be gone after this year, and JJAWful to be gone if not this year, next.

So of 15 picks, we will have 5 starters, 6 with Dickerson, and 7 contributors on the roster.  Reagor and Taylor will probably never play up to their draft position.

But you continue to tell me about late round success being important, so besides Mailata, who do we have.

What do you think the average rate of 'hits" are in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd rds (I actually use 1-20, 21-40, 41-75, and 76-100 b/c that's where the breaks are in terms of probability of success)?

3 minutes ago, austinfan said:

What do you think the average rate of 'hits" are in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd rds (I actually use 1-20, 21-40, 41-75, and 76-100 b/c that's where the breaks are in terms of probability of success)?

So you came  up with your own metric, interesting

All I know is I’m not commenting on tonight’s game. I put in the work and did some solid commentating on joint practices. I’m ready for the regular season.