Just now, Swoop said:

Goff being terrible is exactly my point. Good coaching can make up for a limited QB who can't read the field.

But so we're all clear:

Hurts failing to let plays develop, continually running to his right, continually making stupid decisions like throwing the ball out of bounds on 4th down, throwing the ball out of bounds on a free play, sliding for a loss of yardage outside of the pocket rather than throw the ball away, Ward throwing the ball out of the end zone on 4th down (great play call, eh?), leading the league in penalties and Sanders running put of bounds against the Panthers not once, but twice against the Panthers all have to do with Hurts inability to read the field and have nothing to do with coaching.

Whew, glad that's cleared up.

uh.... until it cant. And it ended for the Rams and Goff. NFL moves quickly. That trick wont work anymore. Hurts is too late. 

27 minutes ago, Swoop said:

Better than Hurts...

Not really. I wonder if a team like Seattle gives him a chance? Not sure he'd be an upgrade over even Geno at this point, honestly. He's washed.

I haven't watched Cam in awhile but last season he couldn't throw it 20yds because his arm was shot

2 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

I have already explained the QB point.  If you're too obsessed with trying to get a win in rather than going back and reading my follow up then I can't help you.  

I’ll pass. I’m not that obsessed with your nonsense. 

Gannon so far has been a disappointment, but he was beloved in NFL circles. Hiring him showed that Sirianni could convince people to take jobs.
On the other hand, Clay has been very good on ST. Elliott has been good. Our punting, TB game aside, has been excellent. We've gotten some good returns. We even blocked a punt! ST has been a strength. Sirianni gets credit for that.

Just now, RLC said:

Gannon so far has been a disappointment, but he was beloved in NFL circles. Hiring him showed that Sirianni could convince people to take jobs.
On the other hand, Clay has been very good on ST. Elliott has been good. Our punting, TB game aside, has been excellent. We've gotten some good returns. We even blocked a punt! ST has been a strength. Sirianni gets credit for that.

In Indianapolis, their DC ran a very vanilla defenses his first couple of years before transitioning to different things. The thought was he was keeping it simple during a transition. Maybe Gannon is following the same path. 

 

8 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

So, JTO loved Howell and you didnt. Maybe you know more than him.

Anyway, Im just beginning the video and Im seeing the first play, zone read that had no shot. Double stacks formation, and theres CBs on the WRs. Single safety in the box. Theyre lined up to stop the run, and the formation is tipping zone read. Theyre ready for it. 

With real QBs who can make checks at the line, they change this to a passing play where you have 4 WRs in 1 on 1 situations who are going to get clean releases and possibly run picks for each other. 

This isnt a play design issue. Its a scenario where the right defense was called and the play wasnt changed. Thats not scheme. Its QBing. 

Does Hurts not have the authority to change a play? Or does he not have the know how? Or does he not have the authority because he lacks the know how? Thats the question that needs to be answered. Theres really no reason to jump to the conclusion that this is a coaching issue because the play design is flawed. The design is not flawed. Its a read option. It wasnt created by Sirianni. Its been around. And it works. The design is fine. Its just the wrong play to run against that particular defense in that situation. Who should have checked out of it?

Is Sirianni unable to call a timeout to fix the call? I am with you that Hurts is likely not helping the situation.  I do think it is harder and harder to separate where Hurts' performance ends and Sirianni's begins.  This isn't just Hurts missing open throws.  I also think the lack of commitment to developing a running attack is directly attributable to Sirianni.  

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

  Anyone in here can pick and chose what they agree or disagree with someone else about.  For f sake.  Was is so hard for you to understand?  You do it we all do it.  

 

 You say JT was high on Howell.....I wasn't blown away.  Ok....wow.  You got me.  Does that mean I am incapable of agreeing with anything else he says again?  

 

Ok.  You think Hurts sucks (which I agree with)  You defend Howie a lot.  How can you ever defend Howie with anything when he was clearly wrong about Hurts.  See how that works?  

 

Yeah, there are issues with the scheme of our offense.  When it takes you to almost the 3rd quarter to reach 100 yards of offense in a game....for the 2nd game in a row.  There's a problem with offense.  Crappy QB not withstanding.  

Im proud of you for just learning how that works. Maybe youll retract your statement about people thinking they know more than the experts now. Or are you still only allowing yourself to disagree?

Why do these arguments always end in extremes? Sirianni isn't being completely absolved of our poor play. He definitely has a lot of issues to work. Getting plays in faster, the ridiculous amount of penalties, and then even the type of penalties and when they're taken are a problem. Red zone play calling has been horrendous. 4th down decisions have been cowardly. It's not all sunshine and roses with him. But he is a rookie HC. With a limited roster. A bumpy road was expected (I think the majority in here had us at 1-5 or 2-4 at best at this point in the schedule).

But the giant, black cloud that hangs over our offense is the QB. And his problem cannot be fixed, even with coaching. He's too dumb to play QB. I hate that he gets them to the line with 10 seconds left on the play clock (not enough time to read the D and adjust, and the coaches talk ends at 15 seconds I believe). I hate that he has no situational awareness. I hate that as soon as he sees a rush, he drops his eyes and looks to run. He's just not smart enough (football wise) to run an NFL offense. He should change his position to RB, he'd be much more successful. 

2 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Cox

Slay

Hargrave

Singleton- he has a lot of tackles and is going to the pro bowl because of all of those tackles....am I right?

Nelson (maybe)

 

The cupboard is a little bare.  No question I have been bishing about not drafting defense for years now.  But you have to admit, the defensive scheme is a little bizzare.  I get not wanting to give up big plays.  But would it hurt to mix it up a little bit?  Be aggressive and send some pressure....just sometimes.  

Are you being serious?

8 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

 

Is Sirianni unable to call a timeout to fix the call? I am with you that Hurts is likely not helping the situation.  I do think it is harder and harder to separate where Hurts' performance ends and Sirianni's begins.  This isn't just Hurts missing open throws.  I also think the lack of commitment to developing a running attack is directly attributable to Sirianni.  

There are only 3 time outs. 

I only saw the condensed version of the Tampa game so I don’t know how fast the calls came in, but before that it was annoying me (less so against Carolina)

6 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Why do these arguments always end in extremes? Sirianni isn't being completely absolved of our poor play. He definitely has a lot of issues to work. Getting plays in faster, the ridiculous amount of penalties, and then even the type of penalties and when they're taken are a problem. Red zone play calling has been horrendous. 4th down decisions have been cowardly. It's not all sunshine and roses with him. But he is a rookie HC. With a limited roster. A bumpy road was expected (I think the majority in here had us at 1-5 or 2-4 at best at this point in the schedule).

But the giant, black cloud that hangs over our offense is the QB. And his problem cannot be fixed, even with coaching. He's too dumb to play QB. I hate that he gets them to the line with 10 seconds left on the play clock (not enough time to read the D and adjust, and the coaches talk ends at 15 seconds I believe). I hate that he has no situational awareness. I hate that as soon as he sees a rush, he drops his eyes and looks to run. He's just not smart enough (football wise) to run an NFL offense. He should change his position to RB, he'd be much more successful. 

I definitely wouldn't put it in those terms.  I think he survived and thrived to a point in college on his athletic ability, and never HAD TO put in the hard study to run a sophisticated offense.  It's quite possible he's a college-only product, the way Johnny Manziel was -- improvise and make plays because their physical tools allowed them to do so.  When they make the final leap to the NFL and everyone is as gifted physically as they are (or more) it's too late for some of them to adapt.  

I wouldn't say it's because they're not smart.  They're being forced way too late to learn the nuances of the position.

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Cox

Slay

Hargrave

Singleton- he has a lot of tackles and is going to the pro bowl because of all of those tackles....am I right?

Nelson (maybe)

 

The cupboard is a little bare.  No question I have been bishing about not drafting defense for years now.  But you have to admit, the defensive scheme is a little bizzare.  I get not wanting to give up big plays.  But would it hurt to mix it up a little bit?  Be aggressive and send some pressure....just sometimes.  

For now it seems difficult to assess players on either side of the ball.  Well, certain groups of players.  On O, mostly the WRs and TEs since the QB is missing open WRs multiple times/game and doesn't throw seem routes so the TEs don't see as many targets as they should.  Even our OL with Mr. Happy Feet abandoning the pocket too soon and the OL has to scramble to block for him.  On D with a seemingly vanilla scheme that lacks any sort of attack how do you truly evaluate the players in that situation? 

It can be said Gannon is doing it to allow the players to adjust.  Meh, I'd rather try and run what you envision wanting to run and see who sinks and who swims.  Then you have a better idea who to hang on to and what areas you need to draft for.  Though, most of us probably already have an idea of that.  But there are some young players who need reps to see if they can actually play and if they can then how well.  It would be cool to see Gannon be aggressive here and there during games.  See what some of the guys can do when you let them loose.

 

Hurts said the teams identity is to win football games and Rome wasn't built in a day. He's dumb. 

4 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Hurts said the teams identity is to win football games and Rome wasn't built in a day. He's dumb. 

I said it before, he's a walking/talking generic quote machine.  Most can be pulled from your favorite sports movies. 

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

What movie was this quote from?  

Its a Kobe Bryant quote 

28 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

In Indianapolis, their DC ran a very vanilla defenses his first couple of years before transitioning to different things. The thought was he was keeping it simple during a transition. Maybe Gannon is following the same path. 

I don't dislike this idea. However, if this is actually happening, we should trade Harris/Nelson/Wilson at the deadline. What's the point of vets who won't stick around if we're not going to use their experience to be multiple?

1 minute ago, Green_Guinness said:

For now it seems difficult to assess players on either side of the ball.  Well, certain groups of players.  On O, mostly the WRs and TEs since the QB is missing open WRs multiple times/game and doesn't throw seem routes so the TEs don't see as many targets as they should.  Even our OL with Mr. Happy Feet abandoning the pocket too soon and the OL has to scramble to block for him.  On D with a seemingly vanilla scheme that lacks any sort of attack how do you truly evaluate the players in that situation? 

It can be said Gannon is doing it to allow the players to adjust.  Meh, I'd rather try and run what you envision wanting to run and see who sinks and who swims.  Then you have a better idea who to hang on to and what areas you need to draft for.  Though, most of us probably already have an idea of that.  But there are some young players who need reps to see if they can actually play and if they can then how well.  It would be cool to see Gannon be aggressive here and there during games.  See what some of the guys can do when you let them loose.

 

I'm going to try anyway:

Offense

QB -- it's not good.  Athlete at QB1 who is very limited at reading, anticipating, diagnosing defenses.  Will only go as far as his athleticism.  QB2 is washed, and QB3 was brought in out of the clearance bin, and looks bright and shiny because of the dullness of the other two.  Early draft pick (or FA) needed

WR -- Young group who will make mistakes but lots of potential.  Smith is a keeper, Quez might be a hidden gem, Reagor could have a niche -- need a veteran presence

TE -- Goedert is a top 6 TE, Jackson and Stoll have real potential

OL -- Dickerson, Mailata, Dillard, Driscoll, Seumalo are the immediate future.  Kelce and Lane (hopefully) still can help this season.

RB -- Sanders and Gainwell are a good 1-2 punch.  Now, if the Eagles would only give them more than 1-2 carries.

 

Defense

DT -- Cox and Hargrave are solid starters; I think of Cox like Kelce and Lane in that he's got an expiry date after this season.  Milton Williams and an early draft pick is needed

DE -- Sweat.  Barnett needs to be gone.  Early draft pick needed

LB -- tumbleweeds.  There's nothing there.  Can Avery and Taylor play?  I guess we'll find out.  Early draft pick needed

S -- better than LB (?) Epps can play a bit.  McLeod and Harris need to be upgraded.  Early draft pick needed

CB -- Slay is very good.  Nelson is pretty good.  Not sure about depth.  

 

Good thing the Eagles have 5 early draft picks next season (for now)

 

6 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

What movie was this quote from?  

duh

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

To use up the extra cash Howie created by restructuring and kicking the can down the road on a few deals.  Come on man, what don't you get?

It's paying for more draft picks. Using 1 year deals for vets to flip them to acquire picks is not a bad strategy. 

18 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

If Hurts still isn't at the point (which seems obvious) of reading a field, why wouldn't Sirianni run the ball more so he has to do it less? Can you really expect the team to pass minimally because the QB is actually limiting them that much? Its the NFL. The QB is expected to be able to play. If he cant he needs to get replaced. You cant just become like 90% run team because your QB cant throw.

Why wouldn't Sirianni give him audibles? Maybe he does. Maybe Hurts is bad at knowing when to actually check out of a play. Maybe he doesnt call the right one. IF Sirianna tells Hurts to just run whats called, then thats something we need to know. At that point you can blame the coach for bad calls.

Why wouldn't Sirianni communicate into his helmet that the play is dead or call a time out? Helmet cuts out after a certain time on the play clock. He cant always talk to the QB. Thats how teams adjusted to the Rams offense when they realized Goff couldnt read a D. Defense showed a look, and when helmet speaker cut out theyd change looks and Goff would be lost without coach help in his ear. You only get 3 time outs. Cant bail the QB out on every play. Again, its the NFL. He needs to be able to play the position without constant hand holding.

Further, if Hurts goes rogue and refuses to run the ball and refuses to audible out our of stubbornness or lack of awareness, isn't it the coaches job to hold him accountable or reprimand him? Yes. It likely happens every week. And at some point you have to figure a QB change is coming. We just dont know how long they are committed to compiling evidence for benching him.

Want to try to answer again? Sure... those were easy.

Young QB's need handholding and plays with easy decisions.  He needs coaching and limits on reads because he cannot handle processing too much.  He needs help on his mechanics.  He needs to improve on his passing game.  I don't think anyone is calling for them to run 90% of the time. I do think the ratio of run to pass and in particular designed runs to passes needs to be better. I mean Miles Sanders is averaging less than 10 carries a game.  They have 157 rushing attempts with Hurts having over 50.  While some of that is on Hurts, the bigger issue is that Sirianni isn't fixing it.

If Sirianni and his staff have a good handle on Hurts' weaknesses, then we should be seeing him progress in at least some aspects of the game.   Again this isn't as much about Hurts' ability to become a starter as much how is Sirianni putting Hurts in a better position from week to week.  Because if Hurts isn't the answer, it's likely Sirianni is going to have to help develop a QB that has cost the team a lot in terms of assets.  Good coaches help players progress and put them in a position to succeed.

We have seen poor performing QBs with this team.  When Wentz was not performing well, we saw Pederson turn towards a running attack or looking for ways to make it easier on Wentz.  When Reid had McNabb, he limited reads, relied on a running attack and worked to get McNabb to improve.  Good coaches help player development and, in particular, QB development.  I do not see Sirianni doing enough to make adjustments to help Hurts improve.  

31 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Why do these arguments always end in extremes? Sirianni isn't being completely absolved of our poor play. He definitely has a lot of issues to work. Getting plays in faster, the ridiculous amount of penalties, and then even the type of penalties and when they're taken are a problem. Red zone play calling has been horrendous. 4th down decisions have been cowardly. It's not all sunshine and roses with him. But he is a rookie HC. With a limited roster. A bumpy road was expected (I think the majority in here had us at 1-5 or 2-4 at best at this point in the schedule).

But the giant, black cloud that hangs over our offense is the QB. And his problem cannot be fixed, even with coaching. He's too dumb to play QB. I hate that he gets them to the line with 10 seconds left on the play clock (not enough time to read the D and adjust, and the coaches talk ends at 15 seconds I believe). I hate that he has no situational awareness. I hate that as soon as he sees a rush, he drops his eyes and looks to run. He's just not smart enough (football wise) to run an NFL offense. He should change his position to RB, he'd be much more successful. 

So hey pot? It's kettle.  If Hurts is a giant black cloud, what it is Sirianni? A basic bootlicking ****? 

 

31 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

There are only 3 time outs. 

per half and teams kill plays with them in every game when there is a bad look in response to a play call.  

 

5 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

Oh, Deon Cain is an interesting player.