7 minutes ago, Swoop said:

Wholeheartedly disagree. He has been okay when it comes to FA acquisitions, but he has been bottom tier with drafting and working the cap. 

Mailata, Driscoll, Sweat, Maddox, Quez, Sweat, Sanders, Gainwell, even Dillard has begun looking like a player, though he got a ton of flack and itll take a lot of time for people to change their mind and admit it. Dickerson is doing as well as you can hope for a guy who had no training camp reps and was instantly thrown in to a starting job coming off injury. You can really start to see a lot of players from the last few drafts panning out and contributing. I still think Milton Williams may become something. Book is out on McPhearson. Theres a chance these classes continue to look better and better.

You can argue a few of those guys came from Joe Douglas drafts, though no one would admit that when they thought those drafts were terrible. But the last 2 drafts without Douglas are looking even better. 

 

Wentz couldn't run a RPO either, for some reason Foles excelled at it.

2 hours ago, ManuManu said:

One thing to note about the Ertz trade is that this year is supposed a really deep class because seniors got an extra year of eligibility due to Covid. Rounds 5-7 have low hit rates, but this year a late 5th rounder is probably more like a 4. 

It's one reason I can see Howie trading down a couple times if he ends up with 3 1st rd picks, this is the year to saturation draft.

4 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

You're right the GM that had to blow his SB winning coach and QB out while the team mires into a 4 win team definitely shouldn't be called to the carpet for his failed signings over 3 years, or his failure in drafting, or trading for players that the team doesn't need/use, or mismanagement of the salary cap.   Or trading for players to then also give them big contracts.  

The argument with Slay was: You don't trade for a 29 year old CB, and then pay him top dollar, when you could have just as easily signed a UFA for that same money.  But, they targeted the wrong CB (Jones, rather than Bradberry), and got an older player, paid a 3rd and 5th round pick, and didn't save any money on the salary cap.  

The argument with Hargrave was that they were continuing to throw money at the DL, because they failed to draft well there, and again couldn't figure out the WR position.  Maybe had they signed a UFA WR, rather than Hargrave, they'd have been able to identify a better option in the draft than zeroing in on Reagor and relying on rookie WRs to be the savior of the offense.

Nelson is a great move?  ok.  I thought it would qualify as an 'ok' move.  Nothing special in that move, just not a complete dumpster fire move like Eric Wilson has been.

The whole "they should have signed Bradberry” argument is a little too convenient considering we wanted to run a man heavy scheme and he was primarily a zone corner. 

Also of note, Bradberry hasn’t been all that good this year. 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

Obviously that isn’t how Sirianni schemed it up. It was a busted play. 

Not really busted.  The unblocked defensive player that goes after Hurts was schemed to be unblocked when Dillard and Dickerson moved to double team.  If Hurts had read that correctly and realized that player would bead on him, then he would have handed off to Sanders.   It is that simple. Bad read. RPO calls for reading the defense and he failed there. 

4 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Not really busted.  The unblocked defensive player that goes after Hurts was schemed to be unblocked when Dillard and Dickerson moved to double team.  If Hurts had read that correctly and realized that player would bead on him, then he would have handed off to Sanders.   It is that simple. Bad read. RPO calls for reading the defense and he failed there. 

It’s busted because he hitched to throw and there wasn’t a receiver where he expected. 

27 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

You pretty much said exactly what I said two posts later. So you are saying they have some talent. lol Saying a team has some talent doesnt mean they are a good defense, it means they have some talented players is what it meant. 

But having so little talent really hampers Gannon’s ability to counter a well rounded offense like the cowpads, KC and Bucs.  Those may be the three most loaded offenses. There just aren’t the pieces.  Some talent isn’t the same as talented. 

26 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

The LB was looping, so if that was a straight RO, it had to be a give.  Frankly, he just needs to give it far more often.

I thought if the LB was playing the run, then we should expect a quick pass. Not sure why JH is hesitating, what the defense is doing in coverage to blowup the read or why the WRs aren’t on alert for a throw - but pulling it out and trying to outrun a scrapping LB sure ain’t the plan.

1 minute ago, Waiting4Someday said:

I thought if the LB was playing the run, then we should expect a quick pass. Not sure why JH is hesitating, what the defense is doing in coverage to blowup the read or why the WRs aren’t on alert for a throw - but pulling it out and trying to outrun a scrapping LB sure ain’t the plan.

There was clearly a miscommunication between Hurts and the WRs. I think he wanted a quick screen against off coverage. I think Smith missed the call. Baldy says the WRs aren’t blocking, but I think they’re stalk blocking since their defenders are back pedaling off the snap.

37 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Raiders game will be revealing. Pretty good against the pass, not great against the run. If they pass 80% of that game there’s a real problem. 

Even if the receivers are open?

7 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

There was clearly a miscommunication between Hurts and the WRs. I think he wanted a quick screen against off coverage. I think Smith missed the call. Baldy says the WRs aren’t blocking, but I think they’re stalk blocking since their defenders are back pedaling off the snap.

Agreed - one of them had to be the hot route, I figured the inside receiver (or whoever for a bubble).

5 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Even if the receivers are open?

It’s the chicken or the egg. 

Is it smart to keep calling it because the players are open, or is it dumb because the QB continues to fail to execute?

 

Sticks and stones … But more flags kill my viewing experience.

The real reason for the emphasis on taunting penalties this year is that with the empty stadiums last year, coaches were able to hear all the trash talk that goes on on the field. At least that's the rumor around NFL circles.

19 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

But having so little talent really hampers Gannon’s ability to counter a well rounded offense like the cowpads, KC and Bucs.  Those may be the three most loaded offenses. There just aren’t the pieces.  Some talent isn’t the same as talented. 

I never said the defense was "talented", I said the defense had some "talent" 

As for Gannon, he hasnt done himself any favors being predictable. 

10 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

It’s the chicken or the egg. 

Is it smart to keep calling it because the players are open, or is it dumb because the QB continues to fail to execute?

You keep calling it and eventually replace the player who cant preform.

How do you change an offense for a guy like Hurts? I dont think you can have a viable NFL offense within the confines of all of the restrictions Hurts will put on it.

The taunting penalty on Avery most likely isnt called without Fournette purposely bumping in to him. 

43 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Wentz couldn't run a RPO either, for some reason Foles excelled at it.

Something about the basketball in his background that made him distribute the football really well in the RPO.  I was just watching J.T. O’Sullivan’s analysis on Carson Strong — he’s running an Air Raid system at Nevada but distributes the ball extremely well with fast processing and accuracy.  He just threw for 377 yards and 6 TDs last game, with his WR1 out injured.

Strong was also highly recruited basketball player before injuring his knee in high school

9 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

You keep calling it and eventually replace the player who cant preform.

How do you change an offense for a guy like Hurts? I dont think you can have a viable NFL offense within the confines of all of the restrictions Hurts will put on it.

Don’t ask me. I didn’t draft him. Who was that, by the way?

20 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

Lurie should pay Vincent to come here and be the president of operations and let him run the show. 

7 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

The taunting penalty on Avery most likely isnt called without Fournette purposely bumping in to him. 

Fournette sold it but seeing it on replay it’s 1. Way out of bounds and 2. Avery went further out of bounds to get in his face. The crackdown is dumb but it fits the penalty and the emphasis they are calling it.

3 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Don’t ask me. I didn’t draft him. Who was that, by the way?

You posed the question.

And, he was drafted to be a backup to Wentz. And he would probably be a fine 2nd string QB. 

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Fournette sold it but seeing it on replay it’s 1. Way out of bounds and 2. Avery went further out of bounds to get in his face. The crackdown is dumb but it fits the penalty and the emphasis they are calling it.

Sure, but I still think it may go unnoticed without contact made between the two players. At that point they need to throw a flag before that escalates.