6 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yes, sometimes it does.   And sometimes the risk is unnecessary or unwise given the injury issues at a particular position.   The Eagles' biggest issue last season was issues of health along the OL.  Grabbing an OL with an injury history as long as Dickerson's at #37 was not a 'necessary' risk.  Sure, it worked out.  But that still doesn't make it a smart move.  That's like saying that investing in lottery tickets is a good retirement plan, because it worked for one guy.   It's bad process, especially when you consider that Humphrey was sitting there on the board at the same time and was good value at that same spot.  

You want to build a SB team? Build elite lines. And that means finding elite linemen.

Dickerson has the potential to be elite. Lane, now that the ankle seems 100% is elite. Mailata has the potential to be elite. If they can get Brooks back near 100%, he's elite.

Sure, injuries are a concern, but you can always find decent guys with little injury risk. Unless you're picking at the top of the draft you're gambling on some feature, size (Kelce), durability (Dickerson), coachability (Brooks, Mailata).

These are the running plays to close out the first half.

On the first one he slides.

Keeper. As with the keeper earlier, he gets down fast, under the tacklers.

Scrambles out of bounds untouched.

44 minutes ago, justrelax said:

Here are Hurts' first six running plays.

This is what has me the most concerned... this contact with Jenkins is completely unnecessary.  As the screen shows, it was 3rd and 2 at the 25.  He could have easily just slid at the 7 or 8, or headed to the sideline.  This was an unnecessary hit and the kind of thing that's just foolish for a QB to do, even one that's 'built different' (as someone said).  

17 rushing attempts is far far too many in my mind to be acceptable long term for an NFL QB.  Yes, he might be able to protect himself and see a hit coming many times, but there are other times he won't.  And its just not a great idea to expose him like that, especially if he's not going to be smarter than taking on a tackler like this once he's gotten the first down and already got a big play.  What's the downside of sliding at the 8 and getting only a 17 yard gain on 3rd and 2, versus taking the hit to secure an extra 3 yards.   

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

This is what has me the most concerned... this contact with Jenkins is completely unnecessary.  As the screen shows, it was 3rd and 2 at the 25.  He could have easily just slid at the 7 or 8, or headed to the sideline.  This was an unnecessary hit and the kind of thing that's just foolish for a QB to do, even one that's 'built different' (as someone said).  

17 rushing attempts is far far too many in my mind to be acceptable long term for an NFL QB.  Yes, he might be able to protect himself and see a hit coming many times, but there are other times he won't.  And its just not a great idea to expose him like that, especially if he's not going to be smarter than taking on a tackler like this once he's gotten the first down and already got a big play.  What's the downside of sliding at the 8 and getting only a 17 yard gain on 3rd and 2, versus taking the hit to secure an extra 3 yards.   

Agree with this. Hopefully it's a good teaching moment for Sirianni. 

21 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

That is next level... super mesh!

Seems more like a Mosh route concept.

Yeah but they would’ve made the playoffs if the eagles didn’t tank…….

14 minutes ago, austinfan said:

You want to build a SB team? Build elite lines. And that means finding elite linemen.

Dickerson has the potential to be elite. Lane, now that the ankle seems 100% is elite. Mailata has the potential to be elite. If they can get Brooks back near 100%, he's elite.

Sure, injuries are a concern, but you can always find decent guys with little injury risk. Unless you're picking at the top of the draft you're gambling on some feature, size (Kelce), durability (Dickerson), coachability (Brooks, Mailata).

Grabbing Humphrey at 37 (which I expected, as he was my top rated OL in that draft) would have accomplished the same feat without the same risk.  Generally, centers and guards aren't first round picks and the elite ones aren't only top 20 picks, so please don't pretend that they are.  The top of the draft OL are generally always OT, specifically LT.  Taking an OL in the top 10 that's not a LT is generally not a smart pick either...because 'elite' interior OL can be found all over the draft.  (Johnson is an exception, because he had LT skills, but wasn't needed to flip to the left side.  If he had been a more traditional 'RT' type, who is a much better run blocker and a bit more of a liability in pass pro, he'd have been a bad choice at #4 overall.) 

2 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Agree with this. Hopefully it's a good teaching moment for Sirianni. 

Of course.  Rookies need this additional instruction.

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Thanks, captain obvious.  Grabbing Humphrey at 37 (which I expected, as he was my top rated OL in that draft) would have accomplished the same feat without the same risk.  Generally, centers and guards aren't first round picks and the elite ones aren't only top 20 picks, so please don't pretend that they are.  The top of the draft OL are generally always OT, specifically LT.  Taking an OL in the top 10 that's not a LT is generally not a smart pick either...because 'elite' interior OL can be found all over the draft.  (Johnson is an exception, because he had LT skills, but wasn't needed to flip to the left side.  If he had been a more traditional 'RT' type, who is a much better run blocker and a bit more of a liability in pass pro, he'd have been a bad choice at #4 overall.) 

Where do you think a more durable Dickerson would have been drafted? Those guys seem to usually go higher than projections.

3 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Where do you think a more durable Dickerson would have been drafted? Those guys seem to usually go higher than projections.

Vera-Tucker went #14.  Leatherwood was over-drafted at #18.

Dickerson was the next OL taken, 19 picks later.

There was a run on OL right after.

2 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Where do you think a more durable Dickerson would have been drafted? Those guys seem to usually go higher than projections.

Doesn't really matter does it?   He wasn't a more durable Dickerson.  He was an injury prone Dickerson who couldn't work out at the combine or pro day because o fthe ACL he was dealing with at the time.  It was tossed around that he would have been a top 20 prospect otherwise... yet every year, there are 'sure fire' first round picks... top 20 picks, that fall much farther than that.  So, what the websites were saying isn't really important.  Remember that Jordan Matthews was considered a first round pick by some, including the NFL themselves, which is why he was invited to the draft on that first day.  Didn't turn out that way, did it?  Aaron Rodgers was considered a top 5 pick by many... but dropped to the 20s.  So, all of that pre-draft speculation amounts to very little in the grand scheme of things.  NFL teams don't follow the 'big board' of the many draft websites.  They have their own boards and follow those.

I can tell you this:  I had Humphrey rated higher than Dickerson, because I didn't have Dickerson on the draft board for the Eagles specifically because of his injury history... and given the Eagles' past history of OL injuries piling up on them.  I felt at the time, and still feel, that they needed to draft a player that was less prone to injury.  Dickerson's risk remains high... He's playing really well... as is the guy I had above him, that was still available.  I think it was a mistake to draft him, and I still feel that the risk was greater than the reward.  

2 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

Bacarty Hot Take incoming....

*IF* The Eagles end up flirting with or making the Playoffs... Nick Siranni is your coach of the year. 

Flirting with I mean playing a really meaningful game week 17 or week 18

I think if the cardinals get home field advantage in the nfc it’s going to be kingsbury. They would’ve done it with colt mccoy winning two games to do so.  

If you had to pick a nfc and afc super bowl representative as of today who would your two teams be? This is a fascinating question this year. 

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

If you had to pick a nfc and afc super bowl representative as of today who would your two teams be? This is a fascinating question this year. 

Chargers vs Packers

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

If you had to pick a nfc and afc super bowl representative as of today who would your two teams be? This is a fascinating question this year. 

Tampa and New England. Easy choices for me. Brady and Belichick, together again.

Apologies if already posted.

 

 

Belichick has done a hell of a job with the pats , they are better every week ,  in fact they are in my top  10 , closer to 5 than 10 , that said Klingsbury should get coach of the year .

 

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

If you had to pick a nfc and afc super bowl representative as of today who would your two teams be? This is a fascinating question this year. 

Eagles vs. Colts

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

If you had to pick a nfc and afc super bowl representative as of today who would your two teams be? This is a fascinating question this year. 

Cardinals Chiefs

Apologies, it’s not on topic but I couldn’t help laughing my butt off. 
 

 

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

Yeah but they would’ve made the playoffs if the eagles didn’t tank…….

Gentleman is such a weiner. 

 

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

11 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Apologies if already posted.

 

 

I didn't know ogres had several layers

17 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Apologies if already posted.

 

 

A solid complement to our single layer pass attack.