24 minutes ago, RLC said:

We learned this in 2017: having a cheap QB makes it much easier to build a good roster. Once Wentz got extended, our roster got weaker.

As of today, I'm leaning towards keeping Hurts for 2022 if only to solve the cap issues moving forward. 

Our roster doesn't suck because Wentz got another contract. Our roster sucks because Howie

I think a running game is the best way to win in the NFL.  This is not to say run a wishbone, but running wins so much.  It opens up the passing game for almost every team that doesn't have a top 5 passer.  Top QBs allow for a pass heavy offense, otherwise run and win.

 

8 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Foles, Flacco, Eli twice.  I think there is an argument for just being good enough to make the playoffs and then hope to catch lightning in a bottle.

It's hard to really define the QB model with Brady winning a third of the SBs this century.

Tbh brady kept a lot of great QBs from winning SBs. Russell Wilson likely has a second SB trophy. Matt Ryan his mvp year likely has one. Very realistically kept mahomes from winning a super bowl his first year as a starter (whoever won the afc imo was beating the rams). Even though the Bucs defense was great last year, he and that defense kept rodgers and Brees from getting a second ring. Also kept Peyton from winning more titles. Brady’s greatness helped keep other greats during that era from being looked at as even greater as they would’ve had more accolades. 

25 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Question...

Foles was a reasonable QB.  And then went on to have the two of the greatest passing performances in NFL playoff history.

Do you see the potential for that kind of play in Hurts?  We win because he raises his game to meet the moment against a quality team.

All i see in my mind when I read this is "What kind of bear is best" 😆 

But, seriously, I do not see that potential for Hurts right now. In the unlikely scenario he sticks around as the starter, I can see him developing into a guy who gets hot at the right time. But I just don't see that for his future.

Hurts is a plus backup, I think he will have a solid career as a journeyman and will get several chances to start in the league due to circumstance or injury. He will preform well because he has some nice traits and he is a strong leader, but he is not the answer for any real contender. Think Fitzmagic, Teddy Bridgewater, Tyrod Taylor... He could find himself in the right place at the right time and wins some playoff games, but I dont see it being up to him.

Lurie wants a flashy passing game, he hired SIrianni based on that sort of logic

So Sirianni couldnt come out of the gate calling games with a 40/60 pass/run ratio until Hurts demonstrated it was necessary.  Sirianni played it the right way.  Sometimes you have to show people their ideas are bad, and that you know what youre doing.

I wonder if Lurie and Howie are having weekly post game debriefs like they used to with Pederson.

If Sirianni gets through the year with 7-8 wins, he'll have gained a ton of credibility in the building moving forward.

4 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

Lurie wants a flashy passing game, he hired SIrianni based on that sort of logic

So Sirianni couldnt come out of the gate calling games with a 40/60 pass/run ratio until Hurts demonstrated it was necessary.  Sirianni played it the right way.  Sometimes you have to show people their ideas are bad, and that you know what youre doing.

I wonder if Lurie and Howie are having weekly post game debriefs like they used to with Pederson.

If Sirianni gets through the year with 7-8 wins, he'll have gained a ton of credibility in the building moving forward.

 

Yet Pederson won a Super Bowl and didn't gain any credibility in the building apparently when you had Lurie and Howie second guessing Pederson on run heavy wins in Green Bay and Buffalo. 

19 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

I wasn't even thinking/talking about you.  DownUnderMike (who I'm friendly with) and Bacarty were the first who came to mind.  You're inconsequential to the blog.  I see you, I think of a redneck in WV F-ing a goat.  

 

NS is in over his head, just as much as you would be in a boardroom or any other room where there are 4 or more people in it who aren't related. Coaching an offense is not just the Head Coaches job.  He's in over is head as a HC....yes....I still believe that.  He's not the O.C.  The same rules we held Pederson to, apply here.  

 

 

I have an idea.  I am going to develop this BS sales strategy and see if my boss notices.  When he calls me in the 2nd quarter next year to ask WTF...,I'll tell him it's working.  Then when he forces me to go back to our normal blueprint....and once that blueprint starts to bare fruit.....again........I'm going to argue that my original strategy was working.  And because of that....I am qualified for the VP role.  

 

I am sorry if this confuses you, I don't know how to make the metaphor translate to the fast food industry.  It's been 35 years for me. 

any literate person would be confused by this post

With the way defense is handcuffed by the rules it's never been easier to win with a less than legendary QB

8 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Foles, Flacco, Eli twice.  I think there is an argument for just being good enough to make the playoffs and then hope to catch lightning in a bottle.

It's hard to really define the QB model with Brady winning a third of the SBs this century.

Yeah I feel like for the most part if you look at winners (Minus Brady) you still have a long list of elite QBs. Where you strengthen your argument is if you look at super bowl losers. Lots of non-elite QBs have made the super bowl in the last 30 years... But even the losers had QBs which typically performed well in the regular season (Matt Ryan, Kurt Warner, Rich Gannon).

At the end of the day you REALLY dont stand a chance at a championship unless you have a top defense. In many cases an elite defense can cover for an average QB. 

 

19 minutes ago, greend said:

Our roster doesn't suck because Wentz got another contract. Our roster sucks because Howie

It's objectively harder to build a good roster once you pay your franchise QB 30M.

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Then you must be really struggling with it.  

uh huh.....tell me again about the sales strategy blue prints that bare fruit, that metaphor hit home for me

4 minutes ago, RLC said:

It's objectively harder to build a good roster once you pay your franchise QB 30M.

It’s really hard when you have 3 out of 4 drafts from 2017-2020 where you botch your first round picks. 

5 minutes ago, RLC said:

It's objectively harder to build a good roster once you pay your franchise QB 30M.

True, but the bulk of Wentz's contract money never even kicked in against the cap until 2021.  He was an $18.6M cap hit in 2020. 

It's only this season, after he's gone, that he's a $33.8M cap hit.

21 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

 

Tbh brady kept a lot of great QBs from winning SBs. Russell Wilson likely has a second SB trophy. Matt Ryan his mvp year likely has one. Very realistically kept mahomes from winning a super bowl his first year as a starter (whoever won the afc imo was beating the rams). Even though the Bucs defense was great last year, he and that defense kept rodgers and Brees from getting a second ring. Also kept Peyton from winning more titles. Brady’s greatness helped keep other greats during that era from being looked at as even greater as they would’ve had more accolades. 

Was about to make the same point. You can’t just "take away Brady’s SB wins” because if you do you’re saying no one won a SB that year. 

2 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

It’s really hard when you have 3 out of 4 drafts from 2017-2020 where you botch your first round picks. 

Both can be true, paying a franchise qb handicaps the team to an extend. To offset the cost of premium players you need to evaluate and draft well so your team always has an influx of quality players. When you overpay guys and you suck at evaluation and development, you end up where we are. The two things exist in a symbiotic relationship of futility.

54 minutes ago, QBhunter58 said:

Yeah I feel like for the most part if you look at winners (Minus Brady) you still have a long list of elite QBs. Where you strengthen your argument is if you look at super bowl losers. Lots of non-elite QBs have made the super bowl in the last 30 years... But even the losers had QBs which typically performed well in the regular season (Matt Ryan, Kurt Warner, Rich Gannon).

At the end of the day you REALLY dont stand a chance at a championship unless you have a top defense. In many cases an elite defense can cover for an average QB. 

 

But that’s the point you need a quarterback that is capable of playing elite against those great quarterbacks if asked to do it. The greatest thing about Nick Foles was he played at an elite level that entire game and he allowed the Eagles to win that Super Bowl.  

The difference between Jimmy Garoppolo winning a Super Bowl and not winning a Super Bowl is that when Patrick Mahomes needed to get going and play at an elite level he did it. Meanwhile Jimmy Garoppolo just couldn’t do it. That was the difference in the game. I thought the rosters were pretty evenly matched. Some advantages both sides. The biggest deciding factor was QB  

this isn’t saying hurts can or can’t do that. This is either have to hope he becomes that or they have to find one that can. Because it’s much harder to consistently compete and win Super Bowls without having greatness at the position because you were at a disadvantage when you play teams that have it.

The odds that the Eagles will land a top 3 (which is what is meant by elite, top 10% or so, the group changes over time, Peyton, Brees drop out, Mahomes drops in, maybe, this year is a caution flag) QB are almost zero. You have to either have the #1 and the odds are still what, 5-1 against? Or get really lucky (Brady).

So you're talking at best 2nd tier, and the difference between 2nd and 3rd tier isn't that great. Eli Manning could be considered 3rd tier if you look at his body of work. Foles isn't even 3rd tier.

And it's not just SB winners, Brady may have cost some QBs a chance at a ring, but also other QBs just got the wrong opponent, Newton against Denver, Flacco beat Kaepernick, Pit beat 37 year old Warner 27-23, Brady beat McNabb and Delhomme.

Passing became more important as they tightened the rules on pass coverage, but defenses have responded by getting faster and lighter, and it's harder to sustain drives through the air against good defenses v a decade ago. Teams are playing more shells, and I predict more top college DBs get converted to safety (the traditional SS is almost obsolete), as safeties are converted to LBs. So fewer big plays, more passing teams stopped on downs as they have to complete 8 or 9 passes a drive against fast LBs and DEs that drop into zones.

That means the balanced offense is going to come back, not most teams, just like you need a top QB to run a pass heavy scheme, you need a top OL to run a balanced scheme - you need to consistently get 4-5 yards a carry to avoid 3rd and long on a regular basis.

Siri is not pass happy, in Indy he had Luck and Rivers, so obviously you're pass first. But look where Reich invested draft capital - Nelson (#6), Smith (#37), LG and RT. He inherited Kelly at center and resigned Castonzo at LT.  In 4 years, #34 (Pittman) #59 (Campbell), Granson (4th rd TE) - so much for investing in receivers.

Siri has a great OL, when Brooks comes back, the best in the NFL, so why not use it? I can see upgrading RB and adding a big possession receiver, but the next two years, the emphasis will be building the defense, depth on the offense can be built in the middle rounds (Driscoll, Gainwell, Watkins are good examples).

Hurts doesn't have to be elite, with an elite run blocking OL, and his ability to add to the run game with the threat of a keeper, this offense should be built on the running game. Hurts just has to make a few big plays and good decisions, not throw 40 times a game - and controlling the ball helps the defense, keeps it fresh and off the field.

20 minutes ago, BwianWestbwook said:

With the way defense is handcuffed by the rules it's never been easier to win with a less than legendary QB

Underthrown deep shots all day baby

6 minutes ago, QBhunter58 said:

Both can be true, paying a franchise qb handicaps the team to an extend. To offset the cost of premium players you need to evaluate and draft well so your team always has an influx of quality players. When you overpay guys and you suck at evaluation and development, you end up where we are. The two things exist in a symbiotic relationship of futility.

How many of the veteran contracts post-SB have paid dividends?

Alshon -- terrible deal.  Desean Jackson -- terrible deal.  Malik Jackson -- terrible deal.  Brandon Brooks has missed far too much time.  Paying good money after bad to Jason Peters was a big mistake.  Wentz is counting $33.8M to play in IND this season.  I'm sure there are others I'm missing. 

Just as bad or worse than the draft record has been where the salary cap dollars have been spent.  

18 minutes ago, QBhunter58 said:

Both can be true, paying a franchise qb handicaps the team to an extend. To offset the cost of premium players you need to evaluate and draft well so your team always has an influx of quality players. When you overpay guys and you suck at evaluation and development, you end up where we are. The two things exist in a symbiotic relationship of futility.

I get what you’re saying. And I don’t disagree when you pay a quarterback it hinders what you can do so you better be good at drafting to make up for the fact you’re not gonna have all this cash to just spend on free agents. 

You might win a Super Bowl with just solid quarterback on a rookie contract if you build up your roster. but it is much harder to do that and the league is showing you the teams who are consistently in competition for a Super Bowl are the ones who have great quarterback play year and a year out even after they are paid. And some of those teams that have those great quarterbacks drafted well and do spend the money well that they do have. The Eagles completely didn’t do that. They drafted poorly and they spent poorly

At some point in time you always are going to have to pay great or good quarterbacks. That rent is due at some point in time. That’s why it’s important that you actually have a great one because when you have less money to spend they usually elevate the team just because of how great they are. 

Eagles OL seems rarely equipped to be great at run blocking. You got 700 lbs of freak on the left side, Lane Johnson on the right side, and Jason Kelce as your center.

I think I'd legit watch a 30 min breakdown on how the line is playing right now.

25 minutes ago, QBhunter58 said:

Both can be true, paying a franchise qb handicaps the team to an extend. To offset the cost of premium players you need to evaluate and draft well so your team always has an influx of quality players. When you overpay guys and you suck at evaluation and development, you end up where we are. The two things exist in a symbiotic relationship of futility.

But it wasn’t just the QB that Howie overpaid and then he overused guarantees and void years on those contracts so the players cost more than they were worth to the team in declining years.  I agree that too high contracts regardless of position hamstrings a team.  But Howie also used draft choices to much for individual players without getting return on those investments.  Howie fails on several fronts. The Rams better win it all soon because they are about to implode.  Similar situation for the Saints and the cowpads aren’t far behind. 

3 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Yep....All can be true.  But you keep latching on to the idea that his "scheme" was working back before he had to do a complete 180 from it.  

The scheme was fine, and I saw all the all-22 analysis showing receivers running open.  The scheme had to be changed to account for the limitations of the QB.  He still has shown very little to no improvement in these areas.

 

Weaknesses

• Has issues sustaining rhythm as passer with so many off-schedule throws
• Inconsistent patience allowing routes to develop
• Slow recognition of early throw opportunities
• Leaves slants and crossers behind targets
• Misses checkdowns and opts for harder throws
• Deep arm dip into elongated release
• Forced speedsters at OU and Alabama to slow for deep throws
• Needs to get better at trusting his pocket
• Quick to drop his eyes when pressure mounts
• More likely to void pocket than climb, scan and throw from it

32 minutes ago, QBhunter58 said:

Both can be true...

Not in this blog.

28 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

The difference between Jimmy Garoppolo winning a Super Bowl and not winning a Super Bowl is that when Patrick Mahomes needed to get going and play at an elite level he did it. Meanwhile Jimmy Garoppolo just couldn’t do it. That was the difference in the game.

Mahomes was 26 of 42 with two picks for 286 yards, or 6.8 yards per attempts and a 61 percent completion percentage.

Your definition of elite is way off here, chump.