1 minute ago, WentzFan11 said:

He said he was happy Hurts was holding himself accountable. 
 

It’s a PC, he doesn’t need to trash his players for fan service. 

Agree. However this presser is as bad as the game plan was. 

4 minutes ago, WentzFan11 said:

He said he was happy Hurts was holding himself accountable. 
 

It’s a PC, he doesn’t need to trash his players for fan service. 

Again, whose asking him to trash his players. You're being hyperbolic. 

52 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Or build up the team with the possible 3 first round picks, and then draft a QB in 2023 once the team is younger at other positions.

If drafting a QB in 2023, they might not have the ammunition to get into position for a top QB though.  And there'd be no 'bridge' QB under contract, as Minshew's contract would have run out.   It changes things significantly.

53 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

So Sooner fans get to watch Baker Mayfield.  

They don't want to see Jalen Hurts, apparently.  🤷‍♂️

Just now, LeanMeanGM said:

Again, whose asking him to trash his players. You're being hyperbolic. 

This was the actual quote

 

46 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Rivers and Ryan haven't won anything and Brees kept coming up short

Ben has been on a decline for years

It's not worth the picks IMO

Yeah, but he was fairly short coming out of Purdue.  Can't blame him for that.

6 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

If drafting a QB in 2023, they might not have the ammunition to get into position for a top QB though.  And there'd be no 'bridge' QB under contract, as Minshew's contract would have run out.   It changes things significantly.

They don't want to see Jalen Hurts, apparently.  🤷‍♂️

Thank you. I’ve been saying this for months now. Just cause you want to get a quarterback in 2023 does not mean you have the picks or ability to move up to get that quarterback. They tried to move up this year to get Wilson and they couldn’t do it because they didn’t have the capital at that time And a team willing to trade back that was high enough up so they could leap the Jets. That scenario realistically could just as well happen again in 2023. You have to have the capital for a team to consider it. And you have to have a team willing to move back to where you are picking. Those two things arent necessarily going to line up in 2023 just cause that’s when everyone and the eagles ideally want the QB. 

7 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

f drafting a QB in 2023, they might not have the ammunition to get into position for a top QB though.  And there'd be no 'bridge' QB under contract, as Minshew's contract would have run out.   It changes things significantly.

Minshew is under contract through next year, and he could by signed to an extension if they decide he needs to be the starter for 2023 while the rookie sits.

Also disagree with Nicks assessment that RPO's count as runs. Because they don't and that's a weak answer as to why did you only run 3 times. 

And "he's ok" with RPO's causing out of whack ratios. 

And "we motion if there is an advantage or if we can figure out what the defense is or to put players in an advantage. We aren't going to just motion to motion." What?

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

Minshew is under contract through next year, and he could by signed to an extension if they decide he needs to be the starter for 2023 while the rookie sits.

Of course... but that adds extra variables.  Lots of them, actually.  

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

Just cause you want to get a quarterback in 2023 does it mean you have the perks or ability to move up to get that quarterback.

I feel the same about your avatar, just because I want you to stop changing it does not mean I have the perks or ability to make you keep it the same.....

 

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Also disagree with Nicks assessment that RPO's count as runs. Because they don't and that's a weak answer as to why did you only run 3 times. 

And "he's ok" with RPO's causing out of whack ratios. 

And "we motion if there is an advantage or if we can figure out what the defense is or to put players in an advantage. We aren't going to just motion to motion." What?

A load of BS.  If RPO's count as runs, we should easily have 25 carries a game with Miles getting 15-18, Hurts getting 5-8, and Gainwell getting a few touches.

THE RUNNING BACKS HAD 3 CARRIES.

Just now, Bwestbrook36 said:

I feel the same about your avatar, just because I want you to stop changing it does not mean I have the perks or ability to make you keep it the same.....

 

That was autocorrect with the perks. Was supposed to be picks. 

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

A load of BS.  If RPO's count as runs, we should easily have 25 carries a game with Miles getting 15-18, Hurts getting 5-8, and Gainwell getting a few touches.

THE RUNNING BACKS HAD 3 CARRIES.

I really feel he did a complete over correction cause every interview and podcast i listened to after week 2 against the niners harped on the eagles ran the ball too much and didn’t throw it enough and attack the niners secondary more. 

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Also disagree with Nicks assessment that RPO's count as runs. Because they don't and that's a weak answer as to why did you only run 3 times. 

And "he's ok" with RPO's causing out of whack ratios. 

And "we motion if there is an advantage or if we can figure out what the defense is or to put players in an advantage. We aren't going to just motion to motion." What?

RPOs don't count as runs if the defense is taking away the run option out of the RPO and making your noodle arm, dyslexic can't hit the broad side of a mountain QB beat you with his arm. 

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

That was autocorrect with the perks. Was supposed to be picks. 

Same thing lol

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

I really feel he did a complete over correction cause every interview and podcast i listened to after week 2 against the niners harped on the eagles ran the ball too much and didn’t throw it enough and attack the niners secondary more. 

Well he admittedly talks to Lurie at almost every practice so I'm not surprised. And when the Chiefs go up 14 it's going to be bombs away because he's going to be chasing points. This is a team that can't play from behind basically ever. 

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

A load of BS.  If RPO's count as runs, we should easily have 25 carries a game with Miles getting 15-18, Hurts getting 5-8, and Gainwell getting a few touches.

THE RUNNING BACKS HAD 3 CARRIES.

I always hated that. This play counts as a run. How about JUST RUN THE BALL! why substitute something that simple? 

3 hours ago, RLC said:

😲🤐

Perfect play-call by Sirianni on 3rd down. Got exactly what he wanted. OL protects very well. Smith gets wide open.

Incomplete.

@Veejer dysfunctional

Big White

1 minute ago, jwill2420 said:

17 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

This was the actual quote

 

I do think that's just coach speak.  I'm pretty sure that he knows Hurts sucks.  They said he could barely get the ball around in practice all summer.  His impressive/statistically impressive game against ATL featured a bunch of 2-3 yard screen passes.  Siriani and Lowie, for all their faults, are both likely well aware that they cannot run their offense with Hurts under center.  

My initial biggest concern was that Hurts would delude them into thinking he should be the QB of the future.  That concern is nearly gone.

4 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

@Veejer dysfunctional

Nothing like bailing the pocket for no reason with a 3 man rush

I am conflicted on this run/pass debate, as I have always been conflicted on run/pass ratio complaints going back to AR.  It's something I've never complained about (imagine that).  

1.  An idealized NFL offense throws the ball A LOT.  The ratio should only even out from frequently protecting leads and running out the clock.  Otherwise, you should be throwing.  The average yards per pass attempt vs. rushing attempt, leaguewide, speak to that.  Our FO is often very skittish with their philosophies and radically overcorrects; so I don't like it when the cries to run the ball get too loud.

2.  I agree with the concept of slamming the accelerator to the floor with Hurts to find out what you have in him.  The counterpoint is that you might want to bring him along gently and he deserves a gradual exposure.  I disagree with that, strongly.  Hurts had an entire rookie year to digest things on the sidelines and in practice before getting a 4-5 game toe dipping as a starter.  He's also not a first round pick projected by anyone as a franchise QB.  So the onus is on him (and the coaching staff) to find out fast.  He has not earned hand-holding or 3 years to show it's his job.  That's just the way it is.  As far as I'm concerned, once Siriani reverts into a running, ball control offense...that means they've given up on Hurts and are just trying to marginally compete while minimizing the limitations of their temporary QB.  If you are a big Hurts fan and you see the Eagles roll out that offense...which we all know is completely antithetical to everything this franchise has emphasized over decades...then you know they have given up and he is as good as gone.

30 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

If drafting a QB in 2023, they might not have the ammunition to get into position for a top QB though.  And there'd be no 'bridge' QB under contract, as Minshew's contract would have run out.   It changes things significantly.

They don't want to see Jalen Hurts, apparently.  🤷‍♂️

I just cannot see Lowie kicking the can on acquiring a QB two years in a row. They passed on Fields and Jones this year, they will not do that again.

Odds are they will go all in for Watson/Wilson, worse case scenario for them would be drafting a QB in the top 5.

No chance of QB purgatory going into 2022 with Lowie at the helm.