6 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Not only is it common, but it takes a few years to develop field vision if a QB comes out of college programs that are one read systems (which is practically every college team these days, name the colleges that run a pro style offense like Stanford used to do). Which is why when you draft a QB, expect a couple years of struggling unless you're really lucky.

Hurts has 18 starts, not exactly a career quite yet. He's up and down, but nothing close to most of the QBs drafted the last 3-4 years.

Just watch how Foles does so much better with the same team where Fields looks like dog crap. And we know Foles really isn't a starting caliber NFL QB.

 

I think you're being deliberately disingenuous to create a slanted narrative about Hurts.

Foles hasn't been so much better in CHI -- that's why they brought in Dalton and drafted Fields.

Continuing to compare Hurts favorably to Fields, Zach Wilson and Lawrence continues to ignore each of those QBs were drafted into terrible environments with minimal supporting casts, and deliberately ignores that Hurts has a full year head start on them.  Hurts is a 2nd year player where the others are raw rookies.  Even before he was starting, Hurts got onto the field and ran plays in an NFL offense almost every week last season.

2 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I disagree.   His running ability and inability to throw deep causes defenses that are paying attention to stack the box and that actually closes things up in the areas where he throws the most.   The Giants have the blueprint.  

Because its that simple... That's why the Eagles were averaging over 200 yards per game the last several games. Teams know Hurts arm is limited so of course they are going to try and take away the run game. But with a dominant OL and a QB who is an exceptionally good runner it makes it very difficult to stop. 

 

2 hours ago, E-A-G-L-E-S Eagles said:

The ability to see and hit open receivers does that, as well.   I'd suggest that chunk plays are more valuable than grinding down the field.

I'm not so sure with our defense...

1 minute ago, purplefiggy said:

kind of a Pollyanna approach, no?  If you strip everything else away other than raw stats, yeah, everything is perfect.  but at least for me, I want more.

 

Then you're being unreasonable and that's on you.  This team making the playoffs this year exceeds realistic expectations for them heading into the season and especially after their 2-5 start. 

 

22 minutes ago, greend said:

ummm, whoever is the first read on plays could easily be "fed" the football. Why couldn't that be Smith?

Because unless you want Reagor and Smith to change roles, Hurts isnt able to do that.

Reagor and a running back are the only ones Hurts can "feed" the ball to.  Anyone else requires timing and accuracy on passes longer than 25 feet.

Just now, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Then you're being unreasonable and that's on you.  This team making the playoffs this year exceeds realistic expectations for them heading into the season and especially after their 2-5 start. 

I'm ok with every aspect of the rebuild with the exception of the QB - everywhere else I think we are ahead of schedule and I think how much further we'd be if the QB was even baseline competent as a passer.

6 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Haha yes it was a bit tongue in cheek, but Lowie has erased a lot of trust. I agree, I'm happy we're in a playoff race and our recent success has been good despite the prevalent negativity. This offseason will be critical for us, with all that draft capital, a draft that looks to have a lot of defensive talent, and our need for said talent, we have to get it right. 

So far, Smith, Dickerson and Gainwell look to be good picks. 

I actually feel that multiple first round picks will relieve some of the tension they have with only one pick.  They may not try to Galaxy Brain the process and just let the board come to them.

If not top 5, easily top 10.

 

1 minute ago, purplefiggy said:

I'm ok with every aspect of the rebuild with the exception of the QB - everywhere else I think we are ahead of schedule and I think how much further we'd be if the QB was even baseline competent as a passer.

 

You're one of many in this echo chamber who are so completely overboard with the criticism of Hurts. 

Boom!

 

With a TD catch to boot!

 

Just now, RememberTheKoy said:

 

You're one of many in this echo chamber who are so completely overboard with the criticism of Hurts. 

ok

6 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I mean, Hurts sucks as a passer, but he is an excellent runner

No hes not.

Hes not fast, hes not shifty.  Hes just big and runs a lot.  Hes a compiler.

3 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Because its that simple... That's why the Eagles were averaging over 200 yards per game the last several games. Teams know Hurts arm is limited so of course they are going to try and take away the run game. But with a dominant OL and a QB who is an exceptionally good runner it makes it very difficult to stop. 

The Giants did it pretty well.  Other teams haven't really done that yet.

Oh so we're back to the "But Hurts makes our run game better!" argument even though it holds no water, statistically

We're a good running team because of the OL and playcalling.  It has nothing to do with Hurts. 

1 minute ago, Mike31mt said:

No hes not.

Hes not fast, hes not shifty.  Hes just big and runs a lot.  Hes a compiler.

Does he take candy away from children as well?

5 minutes ago, purplefiggy said:

I'm ok with every aspect of the rebuild with the exception of the QB - everywhere else I think we are ahead of schedule and I think how much further we'd be if the QB was even baseline competent as a passer.

100% agreed

Too bad their poor decision-making at QB could, and very likely will, extend this "rebuild" indefinitely

13 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

 

Hes not fast, hes not shifty.  Hes just big and runs a lot.  Hes a compiler.

...as he breaks the defender's ankles on this play....

 

Just now, Mike31mt said:

Oh so we're back to the "But Hurts makes our run game better!" argument even though it holds no water, statistically

We're a good running team because of the OL and playcalling.  It has nothing to do with Hurts. 

Yes.  And we are a challenged passing team because our QB isn't reliable at the main thing a QB does...throw the ball.

5 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Does he take candy away from children as well?

You guys are so cute with your fanboihood of our average QB

He was dog ish yesterday

6 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

...as he breaks the defender's knees on this play....

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

...as he breaks the defender's knees on this play....

 

Wow that seals it, hes a great runner for faking out a 300 lb lineman

Hes also holds the NFL record for number of circles run within a clean pocket at 2.5. 

Hurts is an excellent runner, he's not super fast, but neither are most top RBs. Hurts is definitely shifty, far more than say Fields, but it's more subtle than Lamar, he is hard to line up for a hit in the open field, and he is very strong, and can run through arm tackles. You don't put up the kind of yards he has if you're not an excellent runner (volume and ypr).

Nor is he the awful passer he's made out to be, 14th in the NFL in net yards per attempt, which means he's throwing it downfield on a regular basis, since the Eagles don't have a good screen game (b/c they lack a Westbrook or McCoy and the OL keeps changing, while screens require timing) he's not getting those yards on "cheap" passes.

I don't buy the Eagles suddenly have a top defense, Gannon has done more than Schwartz with essentially the same personnel, but they still are vulnerable to a good passer, they're just not fast and athletic enough in the back seven. They'll be exposed when they face a good offense again.

As far as the Giants game, once they got over the weird schedule (Vilma was wrong, teams that play on Thursday know weeks ahead, Eagles got one day notice of the schedule change, and that screws up preparation) they were fine in the 2nd Q, refs took a TD away by calling a perfect call dead, Smith got a bad penalty, and Elliott missed a "gimme" FG.

Yes, Hurts isn't seeing the field as good as he can, but one reason is he's focusing on staying in the pocket, and it takes time to develop a "feel" for pressure. I'm confident he can improve, the $64K question is how much can he improve? But he has the intangibles that tend to support incremental improvement over the first few seasons of a player's career.

Wouldn't surprise me if they either trade back or trade up

I am curious about who the first pick will be though. Defense needs so much help. They could end up loving a QB that's not a big name and choosing him. Also need a WR because of Reagor

How many teams need a QB in this not great QB draft?

Young developing QB takes a team that went 4-11-1 last year to now 8-7 in position to make the playoffs with 2 games left in his first year as a starter. 

 

The arrow is pointing up on Hurts and his development.