Just now, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Literally any and every young QB over the course of a season will have mental mistakes. 

Then you should have no problem showing us some. 

12 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Those are still words... do you have a picture version?

4 hours ago, TorontoEagle said:

The issue is those guys you name all showed they can make NFL level throws without having to hop step into them. The biggest issue though, by far for me, is the mental aspect and the mistakes Hurts makes. These are low level, basic intro to football mistakes that an NFL player should not be making. Stepping out of bounds on a free offsides play, running OOB on a 4th down, throwing it away on a 4th and goal, throwing a brutal INT in the red zone with only seconds remaining in the half, when a simple throwaway would have given us a FG opportunity, that likely plays a part is us coming back to win that game. I'm sure there's even more examples. All the penalties early in the year on the o-line for illegal man downfield, because Hurts didn't understand that he couldn't hold the ball on RPOs waiting for somebody to come open. They had to take those plays out of the playbook because he couldn't mentally understand how to run them. This is all stuff that should be figured out in college at the latest, but here were are with a 2nd year NFL player making Pop Warner level mistakes. That's why ultimately I don't want him for the future, the mental aspect, combined with his lack of arm talent. 

The discussions of Hurts here in the Blog are an interesting parallel to the topics that Ezra Klein covers in his excellent book Why We're Polarized. 

With that said I'd like to pose the following hypothetical question to everyone ... Fast forward 35 days to February 3rd and against past form (and the odds) the Eagles Defense has shown it can contain three of the NFL's better QBs in a row, and the Defense has continued to do what it has done over the past 8 weeks allow an average of less than 20 points per game, while the Offense puts up an average of 26.33 points per game.  Two weeks later, after a competitive loss in the Super Bowl, competitive, but a loss nonetheless, what are your thoughts about Siriani, Gannon and Hurts going into the Offseason?

54 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

The issue is those guys you name all showed they can make NFL level throws without having to hop step into them. The biggest issue though, by far for me, is the mental aspect and the mistakes Hurts makes. These are low level, basic intro to football mistakes that an NFL player should not be making. Stepping out of bounds on a free offsides play, running OOB on a 4th down, throwing it away on a 4th and goal, throwing a brutal INT in the red zone with only seconds remaining in the half, when a simple throwaway would have given us a FG opportunity, that likely plays a part is us coming back to win that game. I'm sure there's even more examples. All the penalties early in the year on the o-line for illegal man downfield, because Hurts didn't understand that he couldn't hold the ball on RPOs waiting for somebody to come open. They had to take those plays out of the playbook because he couldn't mentally understand how to run them. This is all stuff that should be figured out in college at the latest, but here were are with a 2nd year NFL player making Pop Warner level mistakes. That's why ultimately I don't want him for the future, the mental aspect, combined with his lack of arm talent. 

You obviously haven't watched much football. These are the mistakes young QBs make all the time. Which is why HCs hate playing young players.

It's worse the last decade as colleges went to spread offenses and QBs had to relearn everything when they hit the NFL.

5 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

30 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

 

 

That puts their Roster at 53 with Barnett, Bradley and Chachere still on the COVID IR List ... and Malveaux and Mayden still counted in the 53

4 minutes ago, mattwill said:

The discussions of Hurts here in the Blog are an interesting parallel to the topics that Ezra Klein covers in his excellent book Why We're Polarized. 

With that said I'd like to pose the following hypothetical question to everyone ... Fast forward 35 days to February 3rd and against past form (and the odds) the Eagles Defense has shown it can contain three of the NFL's better QBs in a row, and are the Offense has continued to do what it has done over the past 8 weeks allow an average of less than 20 points per game, while the Offense puts up an average of 26.33 points per game.  Two weeks later, after a competitive loss in the Super Bowl, competitive, but a loss nonetheless, what are your thoughts about Siriani, Gannon and Hurts going into the Offseason?

You get into the magic mushrooms recently?

1 minute ago, mattwill said:

The discussions of Hurts here in the Blog are an interesting parallel to the topics that Ezra Klein covers in his excellent book Why We're Polarized. 

With that said I'd like to pose the following hypothetical question to everyone ... Fast forward 35 days to February 3rd and against past form (and the odds) the Eagles Defense has shown it can contain three of the NFL's better QBs in a row, and are the Offense has continued to do what it has done over the past 8 weeks allow an average of less than 20 points per game, while the Offense puts up an average of 26.33 points per game.  Two weeks later, after a competitive loss in the Super Bowl, competitive, but a loss nonetheless, what are your thoughts about Siriani, Gannon and Hurts going into the Offseason?

There's so many variables even within that well detailed scenario, it's hard to say. I'm very high on Sirianni. I'm a wait and see on Gannon, in that I'd like to see what he'll do with improved players. I like that he's able to control the lesser QBs, as Schwartz at times was unable to do. But Gannon leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to the better passers. That might be scheme, might be talent, might be both. Improve the talent, maybe he changes the scheme a bit, I don't know, but I'm willing to give him more time for sure.

Hurts....I've waffled during the year. The issue with him coming back next year is who his replacement would be if you move on. I would really like us to address defense in the draft, with my preference being using all 3 firsts on each level of the defense. That doesn't leave a lot of capital to go out and trade for a QB. There's none in the draft I'd want in the 1st. So, if they bring Hurts back for 2022, and run a similar offense, I'd expect a little more investment in RBs. Not a lot, but draft a rookie in the 3rd/4th, bring in D'Ernest Johnson, and return with Miles/Kenny G, with Howard hanging around. I could live with that for 2022, as an improved defense I believe would have us competing for the division title at least. 

Beyond 2022, I think the odds are very long that Hurts is the guy. The FO seems eager to move on from him. A SB appearance may change their view, but I'm not sure about that. 

9 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I saw a stat this morning that 54% of Americans cannot read above a 6th grade level. I find that to be horribly sad. 

I was talking to my sister, a teacher, about this.  It is somewhat misleading.

Think about what you were reading and writing in HS.  How much of that do you use as an adult?  Unless you go into Science or Literature, the language of Business is pretty basic.

5 minutes ago, austinfan said:

You obviously haven't watched much football. These are the mistakes young QBs make all the time. Which is why HCs hate playing young players.

It's worse the last decade as colleges went to spread offenses and QBs had to relearn everything when they hit the NFL.

No they aren't. Mistakes young QBs make generally come down to making the wrong read, not identifying blitzes and blitzers properly, reading coverage incorrectly, etc. I can live with that. The mistakes Hurts has made is football 101. Situational stuff. It's extremely troubling that he hasn't learned that stuff at this point in his career. 

2 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

I was talking to my sister, a teacher, about this.  It is somewhat misleading.

Think about what you were reading and writing in HS.  How much of that do you use as an adult?  Unless you go into Science or Literature, the language of Business is pretty basic.

Yes I was a neuroscience and history double major, so you're likely right. 

8 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Two weeks later, after a competitive loss in the Super Bowl, competitive, but a loss nonetheless, what are your thoughts about Siriani, Gannon and Hurts going into the Offseason?

There won't be any changes to Sirianni and Gannon, regardless of what happens over the final 2 weeks of the season.  Any playoff berth makes it unlikely there will be a change at QB; a playoff victory would all but assure the status quo at QB for next season.

As a counterpoint -- what about a loss in Washington and another at home to DAL?  Perhaps the Eagles miss the playoffs in this scenario.  If Hurts plays like he did in the first half this past Sunday that possibility is not remote.  Is there a change at the QB position with 2 losses to close the season?

10 minutes ago, austinfan said:

You obviously haven't watched much football. These are the mistakes young QBs make all the time. Which is why HCs hate playing young players.

It's worse the last decade as colleges went to spread offenses and QBs had to relearn everything when they hit the NFL.

Out of curiosity, how old are you and how much football do you watch ??  How many years have you had NFL season ticket ??

6 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

I was talking to my sister, a teacher, about this.  It is somewhat misleading.

Think about what you were reading and writing in HS.  How much of that do you use as an adult?  Unless you go into Science or Literature, the language of Business is pretty basic.

Yes...however...the trades and crafts rely mainly on technical manuals and technical writing.These tend to be the most challenging and difficult levels of reading material.  In general, the people who choose such pathways are the ones below the 6th grade reading levels. 

37 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

There's so many variables even within that well detailed scenario, it's hard to say. I'm very high on Sirianni. I'm a wait and see on Gannon, in that I'd like to see what he'll do with improved players. I like that he's able to control the lesser QBs, as Schwartz at times was unable to do. But Gannon leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to the better passers. That might be scheme, might be talent, might be both. Improve the talent, maybe he changes the scheme a bit, I don't know, but I'm willing to give him more time for sure.

Hurts....I've waffled during the year. The issue with him coming back next year is who his replacement would be if you move on. I would really like us to address defense in the draft, with my preference being using all 3 firsts on each level of the defense. That doesn't leave a lot of capital to go out and trade for a QB. There's none in the draft I'd want in the 1st. So, if they bring Hurts back for 2022, and run a similar offense, I'd expect a little more investment in RBs. Not a lot, but draft a rookie in the 3rd/4th, bring in D'Ernest Johnson, and return with Miles/Kenny G, with Howard hanging around. I could live with that for 2022, as an improved defense I believe would have us competing for the division title at least. 

Beyond 2022, I think the odds are very long that Hurts is the guy. The FO seems eager to move on from him. A SB appearance may change their view, but I'm not sure about that. 

Well said.  I'm of a similar mindset; however, I do believe he has already changed his scheme after the debacle of the first seven games.  So I am hopeful that he will continue to adjust his scheme to match the level of talent.  Hopefully the drafted players will increase the skill levels and athleticism of the back seven, and especially the back five.  Better skill levels in those coverage players should cause Gannon to continue to be much more aggressive going forward than he was in the first seven games.

If Linderbaum is on the Board when the Eagles pick in the 1st Round, I want them to take him.  Adding him as an OG in 2022 and the successor to Kelce at OC in 2023 (or later if Jason decides to stay) solidifies the O-Liene at its current high level for at least the next five years.  It also allows the team to move on from Branden Brooks, which will help the team's Cap situation.  It also makes the trade of Dillard more likely because Driscoll and Clark and Toth and possibly a developmental Day 3 draftee become the backup at OT, while Seumalo and Herbig and Opeta are the primary backups at Guard.

15 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Offense has continued to do what it has done over the past 8 weeks allow an average of less than 20 points per game, 

You obviously meant defense.  But, those 8 weeks are against teams in the bottom 10 of the league.  They would not play those teams in the playoffs.  Nothing about this season tells me we can stop an upper echelon offense, or keep up with them.

1 minute ago, mattwill said:

Well said.  I'm of a similar mindset; however, I do believe he has already changed his scheme after the debacle of the first seven games.  So I am hopeful that he will continue to adjust his scheme to match the level of talent.  Hopefully the drafted players will increase the skill levels and athleticism of the back seven, and especially the back five.  Better skill levels in those coverage players should cause Gannon to continue to be much more aggressive going forward than he was in the first seven games.

If Linderbaum is on the Board when the Eagles pick in the 1st Round, I want them to take him.  Adding him as an OG in 2022 and the successor to Kelce at OC in 2023 (or later if Jason decides to stay) solidifies the O-Liene at its current high level for at least the next five years.  It also allows the team to move on from Branden Brooks, which will help the team's Cap situation.

Yes, I agree that Linderbaum is a sort of "monkey wrench" that would affect my wanting of 3 defensive players in the first. So far, he's the only offensive player that fits that bill. If he is taken in the first, it has to be with the mindset he is a day one starter. I'm not sure if it was you and I who discussed this prior, but for me, any 1st round investment in an o-lineman needs to be done with the expectation that lineman is starting day 1. Otherwise, draft them later, and let Stoutland develop them over a season. 

11 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

There's so many variables even within that well detailed scenario, it's hard to say. I'm very high on Sirianni. I'm a wait and see on Gannon, in that I'd like to see what he'll do with improved players. I like that he's able to control the lesser QBs, as Schwartz at times was unable to do. But Gannon leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to the better passers. That might be scheme, might be talent, might be both. Improve the talent, maybe he changes the scheme a bit, I don't know, but I'm willing to give him more time for sure.

I think it might be timing.  I remember Schwartz in 2016 talking about the scheme evolving during the season as the players became more comfortable with the core concepts.  He was then able to layer some complexities on top of the fundamentals that they had mastered.

It may be the same here.  Gannon may not have had a full tool box as his players were still mastering the fundamentals.  The result against better passers may be different now that he has expanded the arsenal of weapons he can fire at an OC.

 

 

(I intentionally used big words and imagery.)  

1 hour ago, HazletonEagle said:

The QB factory is about to boost its production

That's pretty good. 👍

1 hour ago, HazletonEagle said:

The QB factory is about to boost its production

I'd be happy with that

4 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

I think it might be timing.  I remember Schwartz in 2016 talking about the scheme evolving during the season as the players became more comfortable with the core concepts.  He was then able to layer some complexities on top of the fundamentals that they had mastered.

It may be the same here.  Gannon may not have had a full tool box as his players were still mastering the fundamentals.  The result against better passers may be different now that he has expanded the arsenal of weapons he can fire at an OC.

 

 

(I intentionally used big words and imagery.)  

Much appreciated!

You may very well be right, and I'm intrigued to see how we do in the playoffs, if we make it. 

42 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I saw a stat this morning that 54% of Americans cannot read above a 6th grade level. I find that to be horribly sad. 

y u thinc dat?

11 minutes ago, downundermike said:

You obviously meant defense.  But, those 8 weeks are against teams in the bottom 10 of the league.  They would not play those teams in the playoffs.  Nothing about this season tells me we can stop an upper echelon offense, or keep up with them.

Yeah the second half of our schedule was a cake walk. We knew that going in, so it's hards tro evaluate where this team is right now. But making the playoffs will be the great equalizer. It will expose our weaknesses. (QB, LB's and possible defensive Scheme) 

Thats why it is actually a good thing to make the playoffs now, that we have already damaged our draft position. 

Milton Williams will take a big step in year 2. Short area quickness in a strong DT means OL are put off balance in footwork. In a position based on leverage, that's killer. Partly why Aaron Donald dominates.

1 minute ago, greend said:

y u thinc dat?

Dare u go axing dumb stuff like dose it manner at all?

Good on Lurie.

Back story to this, Bears beat writer for ESPN Jeff Dickerson passed away yesterday at 44 after a 10 year battle with colon cancer. His wife passed away in 2019 after her own battle with cancer for 7.5 years at the age of 36. They both left behind an 11 year old son.