1 minute ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

I would take it more as being tired of arguing over JAGs meaning 1st round players turning into JAGS so then we have to argue over who the better 6th sting running back in camp is.

A perfect example would be arguing over players like Ward and Fulgham because JJW sucks ass. @LeanMeanGM not sure if accurate with my thoughts on what you were saying feel free to yell at me for it lol. 

 

2 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

It’s a question of varying degrees with some of these guys.  If Boston Scott is your #2 RB you’re likely not a good team.  If Greg Ward is leading your WR in snap counts, targets, etc you’re likely not a good team.  These are guys that should be transient players, moved out quickly as more talented players come in.

Fulgham is like Robert DeNiro in Awakenings — went from comatose to dancing around the room, back to comatose again.  Eagles fans are hoping Robin Williams finds the right dosage of medication to wake him up again.  Good teams don’t have these issues.

 

19 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Fair enough on Drake. I and I think most people or teams would pick Pollard over Scott. Yes, their stats are similar but Cowboys stupidly spent a premium pick and then even more stupidly signed their #1 RB to a massive contract so they need to feed him. Pollard should definitely have a more prominent role in that offense. Just looking at our division last year I’d say Scott is behind McKissik, Pollard and probably Gallman. 

If you ask me to choose then yeah I'd take Pollard for the age/perceived talent. But my point is Pollard is considered one of the best backup RBs in the NFL, cost a 4th round pick, and still has pretty comparable stats to Scott. Disagree on McKissic.  Gallman is a weird one for me.  He looked pretty good in games last year but had some real stinkers and faded as the year progressed.  He's a good blocker though which gets overlooked.  Such a difficult RB to "rank".

2 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

If you ask me to choose then yeah I'd take Pollard for the age/perceived talent. But my point is Pollard is considered one of the best backup RBs in the NFL, cost a 4th round pick, and still has pretty comparable stats to Scott. Disagree on McKissic.  Gallman is a weird one for me.  He looked pretty good in games last year but had some real stinkers and faded as the year progressed.  He's a good blocker though which gets overlooked.  Such a difficult RB to "rank".

Not saying gallman is anything special but he giants oline is complete garbage. I feel like barkley would look even better (when healthy) if their oline was at least average. Pff had them ranked 31st last year. They might be right back in that area again next year. It’s why it was ridiculous they took toney at 20 when darrisaw was there and it would’ve been a nice addition. With how Thomas has struggled at LT I might have considered moving Thomas to RT and have darrisaw at LT and moved Peart inside to guard. Heck could also Move Thomas inside. Not idea cause you spent the 4th overall pick on him but he had the versatility coming out to do so. 

5 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

If you ask me to choose then yeah I'd take Pollard for the age/perceived talent. But my point is Pollard is considered one of the best backup RBs in the NFL, cost a 4th round pick, and still has pretty comparable stats to Scott. Disagree on McKissic.  Gallman is a weird one for me.  He looked pretty good in games last year but had some real stinkers and faded as the year progressed.  He's a good blocker though which gets overlooked.  Such a difficult RB to "rank".

I think at the end of the day we probably agree on more things than disagree. I agree Gallman was a weird one when I thought about it but because he was thrown into a starting role early on and managed to be ok on an equally bad team. I had to project how Scott would look in an equal setting if he was forced into a starting role for multiple consecutive weeks and thought he might struggle more. 

1 hour ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Biggest question is who wins the nasty Nate award for the emb 

My Early vote goes to SlimReaper…dude loves making a bunch of lengthy topics in TATE

3 hours ago, Dwide Schrude said:

My Early vote goes to SlimReaper…dude loves making a bunch of lengthy topics in TATE

I'm already tired that guy lol. Gives full blown analysis on every single player. He is like freaking Gruden every player is the best player he has ever seen man I gotta tell you what man this kid right here when he gets on the field he gets me fired up man. 

I was done after the Minshew analysis, he is a decent back up and all and I'm glad we got him but, slim painted the guy as being the absolutely best at every aspect of being a QB. 

You guys have done it. I'm convinced. Totally sold. Congratulations. Well done. The way some of you prop up these average at best players is truly motivating. 

You know something? You're all right in doing so. This team is a juggernaut. This is a vaunted offense that opposing teams stay up the night before thinking about. This is a team that exudes excellence. It is that same excellence that led us to a 4 win season.

So thank you, Boston Scott. Thank you, Greg Ward. Thank you, Travis Fulgham. You deserve all the praise. You guys don't suck, you aren't JAGs, you're good players. You play the game the right way.

I know that their hard work and determination might get us 5 or 6 wins this season. They're that good!

 

FFS.

5 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

More or less, someone you can either upgrade or at worst, replace without skipping much of a beat while not using substantial resources. 

In addition, they are guys that even the fluffers would say "suck" if they had another jersey on. 

Suppose Scott played for Atlanta and was never an Eagle so that we remove bias. Going into our game with them, would anyone even mention Scott as a threat or a player to worry about? 

No. He would be irrelevant, because hes JAG.

7 hours ago, BigEFly said:

I wonder if some teams are maximizing use of the Covid list right now.  Those players don’t count against the 53 so that delays some players being cut to get to 53 until the players come off the Covid list.  Yes, the Covid list players can’t practice and have to meet the testing protocols but seems like there is room for stretching the rule . 

An interesting hypothesis.  Not sure I would see a team being that devious, but it's possible.

7 hours ago, BigEFly said:

PS candidate. 

Why?   I haven't heard or seen anything about him doing anything either in practice, nor remember his name being called once in a game.  Why bring back a retread rather than widening your search and checking out some other teams' cast offs, rather than our own.

Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

An interesting hypothesis.  Not sure I would see a team being that devious, but it's possible.

I can think of one that likes to push the limits on rules 

Just now, Bwestbrook36 said:

I can think of one that likes to push the limits on rules 

Very true.  But I haven't heard a report that anyone on that team is in the Protocol.

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Very true.  But I haven't heard a report that anyone on that team is in the Protocol.

That's true which is kind of odd considering how many players opted out of the season. Didn't the Patriots have the most players opt out? I remember some saying that was Belichicks way of tanking a season to get a QB. 

 

17 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

For the best. I'd use our waiver priority to select as many CBs as possible. 

 

6 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Yes. If you have a team with quality top talent on either side of the ball it’s much easier to live with JAGs. In 2004 when we had McNabb, TO, Westbrook, Douglas, Kearse, Simon, Dawkins, Sheppard etc no ones arguing about Greg Lewis and Dorsey Levens. 

There were plenty of people complaining about Greg Lewis and Pinkston and Mitchell even while Owens was here. People complained about Mahe when we had Westbrook, Staley, Buckhalter and Ritchie on the roster with him. Notable "complaint targets:" from 2004: Pinkston. Lewis, Mitchell,  Mahe, LJ Smith, Simoneau, McDougle, Burgess. 

preseason games I watched , a handful of teams will be moving on from some good talent .

2 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Good.  The Eagles need it. 

Yep. We still need to build that practice squad. 

8 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I know for a fact we are all JAGs on a message board. It’s pretty much the definition of a message board user. 

Not me I’m a super hero. But you already knew that…

24 minutes ago, RLC said:

 

I liked Huntley. Gainwell made him expendable 

35 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

There were plenty of people complaining about Greg Lewis and Pinkston and Mitchell even while Owens was here. People complained about Mahe when we had Westbrook, Staley, Buckhalter and Ritchie on the roster with him. Notable "complaint targets:" from 2004: Pinkston. Lewis, Mitchell,  Mahe, LJ Smith, Simoneau, McDougle, Burgess. 

Yeah those guys are all JAGs. Burgess had a bit of success when he left but that's about it. It's an Eagles message board, and this thread specifically is for the nerdiest fans. Of course we're gonna argue over JAGs, why wouldn't we? 

19 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

  There is depth concerns all over this roster.  
 

Corner

Safety

WR

DE

LB

But you’d probably bring up the 1980 team as an example or something like that to argue your Pollyanna view.  

Oh but according to reports, the Eagles are so deep at LB, they can't decide who to trade.

I see you lot had fun last night... Is there something funny in the air over there at the moment?