5 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

Cracks me up. People are talking about Gannon and the Defense not being so bad, LOL

So let me get this straight. Against avg to good teams we get humiliated, worst looking defense in the league. But against bad teams they play "ok". That somehow makes Gannon seam hes not as bad as people first thought? Yea hes still bad. Until he starts using a better scheme he will always fail vs avg to good teams. Thats not a winning formula. 

I don’t think many have said the defense is not so bad. I think a lot have said the defense sucks against good quality offenses and feasts on bad to mediocre quarterbacks with bleh offenses. I think the argument is more the defense severely lacks enough talent to be what he probably ultimately envisions. And that’s because the Eagles have been **** picking defensive players over the years. When the 3 best defensive players we’ve drafted since 2016 are jalen mills, josh sweat and maddox that’s not nearly good enough. 

7 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Good god.  By the end of this weekend, none of our first round picks will be top 15.

God hates us

2 minutes ago, dawkdaballhawk said:

God hates us

Giants going to dumb luck themselves into two top 5 picks cause of the trade with the bears. 

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

I don’t think many have said the defense is not so bad. I think a lot have said the defense sucks against good quality offenses and feasts on bad to mediocre quarterbacks with bleh offenses. I think the argument is more the defense severely lacks enough talent to be what he probably ultimately envisions. And that’s because the Eagles have been **** picking defensive players over the years. When the 3 best defensive players we’ve drafted since 2016 are jalen mills, josh sweat and maddox that’s not nearly good enough. 

You will never have a ton of stars on one defensive team.  Gannons scheme is too predictable and soft to even get anything out of the players. There is no mix, no confusion. QBs and teams know whats coming before they even snap the ball. You can have 11 HOFers on that scheme and not be top 15. 

This team in this current scheme no matter who they draft, trade for or sign will ever have a chance against any avg to good offense. 

6 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

Cracks me up. People are talking about Gannon and the Defense not being so bad, LOL

So let me get this straight. Against avg to good teams we get humiliated, worst looking defense in the league. But against bad teams they play "ok". That somehow makes Gannon seam hes not as bad as people first thought? Yea hes still bad. Until he starts using a better scheme he will always fail vs avg to good teams. Thats not a winning formula. 

Subjective, and clearly overstated.

The Chargers have scored more points 7 times this season than what they scored against PHI.  Tampa scored more than 28 against 8 other opponents.  KC lit up the Raiders both times.  

Clearly the defense is less than average, but personnel is a huge problem.  Very few defensive coordinators would be able to make chicken salad out of the chicken crap the Eagles put out there.  The draft is about building for the future and the Eagles have very little future value on defense.  

4 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

You will never have a ton of stars on one defensive team.  Gannons scheme is too predictable and soft to even get anything out of the players. There is no mix, no confusion. QBs and teams know whats coming before they even snap the ball. You can have 11 HOFers on that scheme and not be top 15. 

This team in this current scheme no matter who they draft, trade for or sign will ever have a chance against any avg to good offense. 

Eh i tend to believe with better personnel you’d see more out of it. When you lack talent you are limited to what you can do. And it’s not even about getting stars, the Eagles lack talent at almost every position except defensive tackle and cornerback. I would argue the eagles are bottom half of the league if not bottom 10 in the league at Safety, linebacker and defensive end (without Graham they have sweat. That’s basically it at DE and he’s not Brandon Graham). 

26 minutes ago, austinfan said:

We were 4-11-1 last year with Wentz at QB. Yes, we had injuries, but this year lost Graham, and our top 3 OGs (Seumalo, Brooks and Driscoll), Lane for a stretch of games, Sanders for a stretch of games, traded Ertz. So it's not like Sirianni was handed a lot more to work with.

It's a rebuild, people expecting Gannon to stop top QBs are dreaming, he has Slay, no safeties, no LBs who can cover (Edwards is smart, tough but limited and needs athletic OLBs , Taylor was coming on but . . .), a solid DL without an elite pass rusher. He's had to choose between being nickled and dimed to death or a quick decapitation. Just like Schwartz, he can stop the bad QBs but not the good ones b/c he doesn't have the horses - but he's doing a better job (Eagles faced a lot of bad QBs last season) with essentially the same personnel as last season.

2021:  ppg (15), ypp (5), ypa (5), NY/A (15), TO (28), Pressure % (21)

2020:  ppg (20), ypp (14), ypa (10), NY/A (20), TO (24), Pressure % (2)

Biggest difference is how the DL plays, one gap attack under Schwartz, 3/4 - 4/3 hybrid under Gannon. Gannon also gives up the short pass, which makes it hard to get pressure.

Hurts is a work in progress, but Eagles are 11th in points scored (13th in offense ppg), 9th in Y/P, 5th in yards per drive, 11th in points per drive.

Given where they started, a pretty solid season going into a draft with 3 1st rd picks, 3 5th rd picks, and a probable pick for Dillard (3rd?).

I wonder why that is. 

16 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Weird flex but ok

Giants have been the smartest team to scheme against us to this point. 

Stop the run, contain Hurts behind the LOS and make Hurts win with his arm and decision making. 

I had us splitting with the Gmen at the beginning of the season so this was our win this week. But if the Giants stick with the same game plan then Hurts better show a lot better choices in his progression reads and accuracy. 

2 minutes ago, EagleJoe8 said:

I wonder why that is. 

Thanks Doug….. wait no it’s carson

2 hours ago, bpac55 said:

The running game is what has really created all of these numbers and 100% of the credit goes to Sirianni for realizing that's what works.  I'm curious to know what counts as an explosive play because IMO, that's what this team is lacking.  Seems like Goedert has had 2 of the longest plays in that timeframe being in the 40 yard range.  But does long play=explosive play?  

Nick certainly is on his way to winning me over.  

10 yard run and i think 15 yard pass are considered explosives plays

Just now, Bacarty2 said:

I would call Brees up. Him throwing left handed with his eyes closed are still better then what the Saints have

Yeah but putting the helmet on would likely mess up Bree’s’ new toupee

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

Thanks Doug….. wait no it’s carson

Gannon is way too soft. Yes, his personnel isn't the best, and he probably doesn't trust them. But against QB's like Zach Wilson and Gilbert Grape, he needs to be way more aggressive and stop making it so easy for them. I'm expecting more of the same against Fromm. He'll do everything he can to stop a deep shot which Fromm more than likely won't complete anyway, and give up tons of soft zone for them to move the ball down the field. 

3 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

 sheesh, whats eating you

? Is there something you disagree with

NVM, somehow I missed my own reference lol

And the Vikings have now been eliminated from the playoffs. He's also unvaccinated so going to miss 10 days.

9 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Gannon is way too soft. Yes, his personnel isn't the best, and he probably doesn't trust them. But against QB's like Zach Wilson and Gilbert Grape, he needs to be way more aggressive and stop making it so easy for them. I'm expecting more of the same against Fromm. He'll do everything he can to stop a deep shot which Fromm more than likely won't complete anyway, and give up tons of soft zone for them to move the ball down the field. 

I forget what podcast I was listening to but they made a logical point that the Eagles in general gameplan vs WFT might have been we don’t wanna blitz because if we do and they hit a big play that’s the only way Washington would be able to score enough points to win that game besides the offense turning it over. Which frankly WFT scored 17 points on a fluke interception that bounced of goedert’s foot to get them seven points. And then hurts is fumble where they had excellent field position to start. They really only had one drive where they went the length of the field and scored a touchdown. 

i’m not saying it’s right or wrong (frankly i would’ve blitzed way more and tried to create turnovers) but there’s some logic to it. If you don’t believe Gilbert and Washington can consistently move the ball up and down the field with long fields then why blitz and potentially give them a home run play on the blitz if you don’t get home. I tend to think the Eagles didn’t believe Washington could score enough points unless they turn the ball over (10 off that) and gave up multiple big plays

5 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

And the Vikings have now been eliminated from the playoffs

Eagles right now with this and the saints news:

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

I forget what podcast I was listening to but they made a logical point that the Eagles in general gameplan vs WFT might have been we don’t wanna blitz because if we do and they hit a big play that’s the only way Washington would be able to score enough points to win that game besides the offense turning it over. Which frankly WFT scored 17 points do yo a fluke interception that bounced of goedert’s foot to get them seven points. And then hurts is fumble where they had excellent field position to start. They really only had one drive where they went the length of the field and scored a touchdown. 

i’m not saying it’s right or wrong (frankly i would’ve blitzed way more and tried to create turnovers) but there’s some logic to it. If you don’t believe Gilbert and Washington can consistently move the ball up and down the field with long fields then why blitz and potentially give them a home run play on the blitz if you don’t get home. I tend to think the Eagles didn’t believe Washington could score enough points unless they turn the ball over (10 off that) and gave up multiple big plays

It makes some sense to not be ultra aggressive after going down quickly in a 10-0 hole. But they still were down to a third string C, no Scherff with a T playing in his place, and there other T just came off IR. Take some shots at them.

Just now, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Eagles right now with this and the saints news:

Until they lose Kelce and Mailata and 1/2 the coaching staff

Win the next 2 and I think we're in the dance, sweet.

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

It makes some sense to not be ultra aggressive after going down quickly in a 10-0 hole. But they still were down to a third string C, no Scherff with a T playing in his place, and there other T just came off IR. Take some shots at them.

I don’t disagree with you. I would’ve blitzed more. I thought they should’ve attacked more considering the fact the best offensive lineman they had was out. And then Gibson had the toe injury. They really only had one weapon out there that could really beat you in that game which was Terry McLaurin. 

Tbh I felt like the Eagles played it conservative against wft. Even on offense when was fourth and goal from the 2, they kick the FG and then they didn’t take the penalty and took the points instead of going for it. It felt like both offensively and defensively, they were more conservative cause they knew they could win that way and didn’t want to potentially screw that up.

10 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Until they lose Kelce and Mailata and 1/2 the coaching staff

Could you imagine if that happened in week 18 with everything on the line against Dallas? Don’t know if the linc and Philly would survive 

Who is our Dalvin Cook?

In other words, who the one guy we can't afford to get Covid?

Kelce & Slay, definitely.

Lane or Mailata, but not both, as long as Dillard is available.

Same for Cox and Hargrave.

Thoughts?

Just now, Connecticut Eagle said:

Who is our Dalvin Cook?

In other words, who the one guy we can't afford to get Covid?

Kelce & Slay, definitely.

Lane or Mailata, but not both, as long as Dillard is available.

Same for Cox and Hargrave.

Thoughts?

Kelce and Goedert. 

3 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Who is our Dalvin Cook?

In other words, who the one guy we can't afford to get Covid?

Kelce & Slay, definitely.

Lane or Mailata, but not both, as long as Dillard is available.

Same for Cox and Hargrave.

Thoughts?

I don't think we have one player like that, a Jonathan Taylor or Cooper Kupp type who is carrying the team.