Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

I'd love to hear your thoughts on where we disagree.

I don’t think we need to pair down Hurts running as much as you do (certainly less though), and from a previous post you said you hated the QB draw. I’m good with calls like that. 

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

He also limits the passing game, so it is a zero gain for total offense.

Possibly. But that’s a different argument. 

1 minute ago, Ipiggles said:

I'll add this with Newtons skillset being above Hurts, if he was as coachable (as you say Hurts is), he probably would have had a higher ceiling than Hurts has.

I still think it is a good comparo. and I'll disagree with the bolded. He still needs to improve to be a way better QB. Unfortunately he does not match Newtons physical abilities, arm strencth etc. I would say if Hurts improves he could become a better QB than Newton, right now they are similar. 

A QB who knows its about moving the sticks is always better than the highlight real QB. I would say that is the basis of the lack of playoff success in list of QBs previously cited. Wilson is about moving the sticks. It's an opinion but I think it is well documented in the theories behind Moneyball. Very physically gifted QBs often don't develop the discipline to take what the game presents. On the other end of the spectrum are the dink and dunk guys who are equally incapable of sustained winning. If you broaden out the comparison beyond those super physically gifted QBs, all of the sudden Hurts is a comparatively good athlete. Newton's skillset is way above Hurts but his potential to win was very limited by the way he approached the game. It's still an open question but Hurts has shown a lot more willingness to be a move the sticks, play within the scheme, kind of QB, IMO.

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Just to be clear: I don’t think we have to have a running QB to have a good ground game. The OL is obviously really good, and that’s the catalyst. Hurts, however, clearly helps the ground game a great deal and takes it to another level. 

That's what I thought you thought.  There are some who seem to believe that the ground game doesn't work without Hurts.  That's not the case.   This is a top 5 running game, without Hurts.  It is likely the number 1 running game with Hurts, but part of that is due to Hurts' yards.  The running back contributions are likely very close to the same yardage with or without Hurts... or so would the Jets game lead us to believe.

1 minute ago, Next_Up said:

A QB who knows its about moving the sticks is always better than the highlight real QB. I would say that is the basis of the lack of playoff success in list of QBs previously cited. Wilson is about moving the sticks. It's an opinion but I think it is well documented in the theories behind Moneyball. Very physically gifted QBs often don't develop the discipline to take what the game presents. On the other end of the spectrum are the dink and dunk guys who are equally incapable of sustained winning. If you broaden out the comparison beyond those super physically gifted QBs, all of the sudden Hurts is a comparatively good athlete. Newton's skillset is way above Hurts but his potential to win was very limited by the way he approached the game. It's still an open question but Hurts has shown a lot more willingness to be a move the sticks, play within the scheme, kind of QB, IMO.

Would agree 100% with this. 

6 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Not to mention.  But they know who is and who isn’t of high character without even meeting a guy.  Hey man, we all should show more poise in possibly tragic situations.  

Agreed. 

7 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t think we need to pair down Hurts running as much as you do (certainly less though), and from a previous post you said you hated the QB draw. I’m good with calls like that. 

I dont have an issue with designed runs for Hurts, it is one of his strengths. The result may be he gets injured and Minshew has to come in?  I dont actually see that as a negative, more of a sideways move, so I dont care if we design runs for Hurts, let him do what he is good at. 

3 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t think we need to pair down Hurts running as much as you do (certainly less though), and from a previous post you said you hated the QB draw. I’m good with calls like that. 

On 2nd and 6 from midfield in the middle of the 3rd quarter?   Interesting.    I see the value of that type of play on a 3rd and 4, in the red zone... but not in that context.  It's not the play call itself, but the context of when it happen.  On the flip side, I am almost always against a QB sweep...

5 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

right, because were only looking at his 20 games. 

Not his college performance. his arm strength. what hundreds of other scouts thought of him coming out of college. what other scouts think of him now. what analysts who get paid millions of dollars think of him. We're only looking at those 20 games. 

Not to mention the head coach who started winning with a bad roster when they took the ball out of his hands more. 

 

Oh so not only are you an expert in pro scouting of QBs, you’ve also developed the capacity to do college scouting as well. Truly impressive. Most NFL teams break those into separate departments but I applaud your versatility.

1 minute ago, Thrive said:

Oh so not only are you an expert in pro scouting of QBs, you’ve also developed the capacity to do college scouting as well. Truly impressive. Most NFL teams break those into separate departments but I applaud your versatility.

I've just gotta know what you are trying to prove with all this.  Are you suggesting that no one is permitted to have an opinion about anything they see on the field and then share it, because we are not professional scouts?    Sure.  That makes sense.  It does make one wonder what your purpose in being on such a message board is though... or is it just to tell everyone else that they can't have an opinion and share it because we are not professionals?  

I suppose you've never had an opinion on any QB, RB, or any other player in the history of your fandom.

What's the end game here exactly?  

4 hours ago, Bacarty2 said:

I cant believe I have to explain this to an adult...

Playing weaker competition will make ok players look a lot better than they actually are. 

Lloyd played 1 really good team and 1 top 10 school and he looked like trash both times. 

Dean, who was a top 2 player in the best defense in the country, played about 7 really good teams and 2 top 5 teams and he's looked really good each time. 

See the difference? 

If Lloyd played in the SEC he'd probably be a 3rd round pick 

We're not talking about where they are drafted, were talking about if they'll turn out to be good players or not 

Which I concluded has not alot to do with their college conference 

Plenty of players in the NFL from smaller conferences that are better than players from bigger conferences.

If one is just going to willy nilly exclude players because of their conference or pick others based in their conference then when isn't doing ones due diligence 

Like I said if take Lloyd over Dean for the simple fact that Lloyd has NFL size dean is like 210 pounds, I'll pass on a 210 pound LB no matter what conference he's from.

17 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Just to be clear: I don’t think we have to have a running QB to have a good ground game. The OL is obviously really good, and that’s the catalyst. Hurts, however, clearly helps the ground game a great deal and takes it to another level. 

When your QB has more rushing yards than your star RB then yea he clearly helps the ground game

That shouldn't happen IMO though

34 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

I'd love for the Eagles to beat TB and retire Brady, but Brady will get calls from the refs and their run defense is solid -- no thanks

Stafford sucks -- I'd take a matchup against the Rams on the chance that he throws 3 INT

ARI hasn't been playing well and no Hopkins (?) -- not a bad matchup

 

I wouldn't pick the Eagles in any of those games, but ARI would be my first choice, followed by the Rams, then the Bucs last. 

I think Arizona is interesting because it's both young teams.  Also they do have some of our former players.   Rams are good but Stafford is the wild card, which one will show up.   

27 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Bucs took their foot off the gas against us in Philly, they will destroy us in Tampa.  And don't think Brady will not want to get revenge for the Super Bowl loss.

Rams, last time we played them in LA, we could not stop Tyler Higbee with Goff as his QB, what are we gonna do to deal with Kupp and Beckham.

Cards, for whatever reason we can not win in their stadium, and Ertz has that inside info.

I would rather play the Cowboys, as they already have their hands around their throat, ready for the choke job.

Yes the Bucs seemed to cool off but we were very close to catching up, the weak taunting call kept that drive alive.  The Eagles Super Bowl loss clearly got on Brady's nerves.   They just did a show about it on his ESPN Documentary.    He may want revenge but in the playoffs anything can happen.   In his 5 NFC EAST Playoff Games

Vs Eagles Super bowl XXXIX (24-21, only won by 3) W

Vs Giants Super Bow XLII (17-14, Loss perfect season) L

Vs Giants Super Bowl  XLVI (21-14, Loss to Eli Twice) L

Vs Eagles Super Bowl LII (41-33, Played his best playoff game ever in a Loss) L

Vs Washignton (31-23, Henike thrown into the fire and Washington hung with them, beat them this year) W

Vs Eagles ?????

 

I don't know what it is but the NFC EAST seems to give Brady Teams problems.   

8 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I've just gotta know what you are trying to prove with all this.  Are you suggesting that no one is permitted to have an opinion about anything they see on the field and then share it, because we are not professional scouts?    Sure.  That makes sense.  It does make one wonder what your purpose in being on such a message board is though... or is it just to tell everyone else that they can't have an opinion and share it because we are not professionals?  

I suppose you've never had an opinion on any QB, RB, or any other player in the history of your fandom.

What's the end game here exactly?  

There is a difference between expressing an opinion (overlaid with some appreciation for the fact that most of us have no clue what the right answer is - and the ones that do are often silent) versus the declarative statements that are being made. 
 

My response was geared toward some posts that, although clearly opinions, were posited as final conclusions by certain individuals (which were later confirmed by the style of arguments they used to defend themselves against my response).

Just now, KINGnabb said:

I don't know what it is but the NFC EAST seems to give Brady Teams problems.   

I think the answer is actually pretty simple... pass rush with only 4, especially with regards to pressure from up the middle.   Eagles and Giants Super Bowl wins, they both moved DEs (big, strong DEs) that could bull rush and win against OGs inside to DT and takes away his ability to move up, with faster DEs, that can swing around the outside.  Think back to the fumble in SBLII, he tried to step up to avoid Chris Long, only to step up into the path of Brandon Graham.

23 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

right, because were only looking at his 20 games. 

Not his college performance. his arm strength. what hundreds of other scouts thought of him coming out of college. what other scouts think of him now. what analysts who get paid millions of dollars think of him. We're only looking at those 20 games. 

Not to mention the head coach who started winning with a bad roster when they took the ball out of his hands more. 

 

Don't forget Bama deciding Tua was better and letting him leave.

13 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

On 2nd and 6 from midfield in the middle of the 3rd quarter?   Interesting.    I see the value of that type of play on a 3rd and 4, in the red zone... but not in that context.  It's not the play call itself, but the context of when it happen.  On the flip side, I am almost always against a QB sweep...

Thoughts on the option we run? I generally don't like it, but it works for us because of the attention defenses have to pay to Hurts. I generally don't like it as there's too many points of failure that can occur. Even on the Scott TD this week, it almost failed because Hurts tripped. 

7 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

5 years from now when Hurts is still a lower tier starter or back up, somewhere, I wonder if these sheep will be saying. "He’s only 28 and only has 60 starts under his belt”.  

It will be "He hasn't even turned 30 yet! QB's regularly play until (insert Tom Bradys current age)!" starting around his 27th birthday

6 minutes ago, KINGnabb said:

I think Arizona is interesting because it's both young teams.  Also they do have some of our former players.   Rams are good but Stafford is the wild card, which one will show up.   

Yes the Bucs seemed to cool off but we were very close to catching up, the weak taunting call kept that drive alive.  The Eagles Super Bowl loss clearly got on Brady's nerves.   They just did a show about it on his ESPN Documentary.    He may want revenge but in the playoffs anything can happen.   In his 5 NFC EAST Playoff Games

Vs Eagles Super bowl XXXIX (24-21, only won by 3) W

Vs Giants Super Bow XLII (17-14, Loss perfect season) L

Vs Giants Super Bowl  XLVI (21-14, Loss to Eli Twice) L

Vs Eagles Super Bowl LII (41-33, Played his best playoff game ever in a Loss) L

Vs Washignton (31-23, Henike thrown into the fire and Washington hung with them, beat them this year) W

Vs Eagles ?????

 

I don't know what it is but the NFC EAST seems to give Brady Teams problems.   

Notice how 4 of those 5 games are the Super Bowl.  Brady is not gonna get bounced by a .500 team in the first round.

24 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Maybe if we had better LBs we could unleash him more like that next year.  But, either way, this team desperately needs another edge rusher.  Barnett is likely gone, Graham is way over the hill and then there's some mid-level potential in a guy like Jackson, but mostly as a reserve.

People forget about this now, but Brandon Graham was our best EDGE vs. Atlanta in week 1.

Graham gets the full year to rehab his achilles, he should still be a good run-stopping EDGE in 2022.

Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

I think the answer is actually pretty simple... pass rush with only 4, especially with regards to pressure from up the middle.   Eagles and Giants Super Bowl wins, they both moved DEs (big, strong DEs) that could bull rush and win against OGs inside to DT and takes away his ability to move up, with faster DEs, that can swing around the outside.  Think back to the fumble in SBLII, he tried to step up to avoid Chris Long, only to step up into the path of Brandon Graham.

Exactly  Good point.  But if we get Tampa, Gannon and the D can't be passive.  Brady will just pick us apart underneath.   We have to pressure him like the G Men and Brandon did in the Super bowl.  

2 minutes ago, Thrive said:

There is a difference between expressing an opinion (overlaid with some appreciation for the fact that most of us have no clue what the right answer is - and the ones that do are often silent) versus the declarative statements that are being made. 
 

My response was geared toward some posts that, although clearly opinions, were posited as final conclusions by certain individuals (which were later confirmed by the style of arguments they used to defend themselves against my response).

Ok

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

Don't forget BAMA deciding Tua was better and letting him leave.

some in here might say, that thats why they are in College and not the NFL.... 

2 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Thoughts on the option we run? I generally don't like it, but it works for us because of the attention defenses have to pay to Hurts. I generally don't like it as there's too many points of failure that can occur. Even on the Scott TD this week, it almost failed because Hurts tripped. 

That was a designed run from everything I could tell... but QBs get stepped on sometimes.  It happens.  

 

Not sure what you mean by the 'option we run'.  Can you give me an example?

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

That was a designed run from everything I could tell... but QBs get stepped on sometimes.  It happens.  

 

Not sure what you mean by the 'option we run'.  Can you give me an example?

Sorry, just the option play in general. We've run it a few times this year and mostly successfully. Maybe it was a designed run, I'll go back and look

Edit - yep, you're right, it was a designed toss where Hurts tripped....for some reason I thought it was an option run