Is it time for Minshew *** Poll ***

[birdman#12]

13 minutes ago, Swoop said:

I think he's too limited as a passer, overall. Not saying he couldn't start and win games, just don't see him as an elite guy moving forward. 

Infinitely better than Hurts though.

My opinion is you don't need an "elite" guy to win in the NFL.  What you need is an effective PASSER....  Minshew has a similar passing skill set to Brees.....the short to medium passing game is where he is most effective.  Not as good on the deep balls, but able to throw to give receivers a chance to make a play.   And the eagles don't need him to run, with the talented group of RBs they have.....

A few other things that should be taken under consideration....is the ability to play under playoff pressure....the ability to play well from behind and the ability to keep composure after multiple mistakes......and how he inspires the guys around him.  That all takes time to evaluate.

Now I'm not comparing Minshew to Brees.......Brees had enormous opportunities in his career that Minshew will probably never get.  But in the facet of the passing game, Minshew most effective area of production is like Brees.

[E-A-G-L-E-S Eagles]

10 minutes ago, birdman#12 said:

My opinion is you don't need an "elite" guy to win in the NFL.  What you need is an effective PASSER....  Minshew has a similar passing skill set to Brees.....the short to medium passing game is where he is most effective.  Not as good on the deep balls, but able to throw to give receivers a chance to make a play.   And the eagles don't need him to run, with the talented group of RBs they have.....

A few other things that should be taken under consideration....is the ability to play under playoff pressure....the ability to play well from behind and the ability to keep composure after multiple mistakes......and how he inspires the guys around him.  That all takes time to evaluate.

Now I'm not comparing Minshew to Brees.......Brees had enormous opportunities in his career that Minshew will probably never get.  But in the facet of the passing game, Minshew most effective area of production is like Brees.

Good points.  The fact that the QB position yesterday was played like the QB position is supposed to be played helped the whole team.  There was rhythm and consistency to what he did. I don't see Minshew as a "franchise" talent in the purest of definitions, but he is more than workable as a starting QB for this team going forward. The team would have to give him time to get his legs back under him and learn the system and players, but that is what we are doing already. 

[Bwestbrook36]

12 hours ago, NOTW said:

So much fire on the field with him and Sirianni

[birdman#12]

1 hour ago, E-A-G-L-E-S Eagles said:

Good points.  The fact that the QB position yesterday was played like the QB position is supposed to be played helped the whole team.  There was rhythm and consistency to what he did. I don't see Minshew as a "franchise" talent in the purest of definitions, but he is more than workable as a starting QB for this team going forward. The team would have to give him time to get his legs back under him and learn the system and players, but that is what we are doing already. 

See, that's the term that is overused and really, what does that mean?   I don't really expect and explanation......I've just heard it applied to dozens of QBs over the years, especially when they come out of college and until they are discarded as "isn't able to get it done"......but it's mostly because the team that drafted them screwed them up in a number of ways.

Most guys drafted high as "the guy" go into a lousy organization with either a lame duck coach, or a new head coach.  Those teams are usually devoid of supporting talent but they throw the kid in there to "save the franchise"....usually, he's sacked a million times, has lousy skill players and his confidence is beat to sh--.  Then the coach gets fired and a new system comes, a new learning curve and maybe some new skill players.....maybe.  The new coach wants a guy to run "his offense" and usually the QB is benched or cast off the next year.

"Franchise QB" is not a viable term.......but a team that drafts a QB, gives him the STABLE coaching staff to teach him and maximize his talent, the time to develop, has patience with his mistakes and gives him the supporting cast he needs to drive the ship.  That's what teams SHOULD be....a Franchise for a QB.....not a QB factory looking for the next project.....

The QBs that are long term, high performers have one thing in common......they were with the same coaches for years at the beginning of their careers....some sat, some played but in a very limited responsibility.  They were brought along, in the same offense, and were not expected to "save the franchise".  Those teams were patient and build around the QB.

Roethlisburger, Rodgers, Wilson, Brady, Mahommes.......Brady and Mahommes sat for a year....rodgers, 4 years.....Roethlisberger started but was not asked to throw more than 21 times a game,.......Wilson is an exception, he was a high performer as soon as he was drafted......in the 3rd round because of his height...LMAO.

My point is that you can't tell how good a guy is going to be if the organization doesn't know how to cultivate and develop QBs. I wonder how the hell NFL teams evaluate college QBs.

[NOTW]

15 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

So much fire on the field with him and Sirianni

It's like Jeff Garcia 2.0 - "he's fiery!"

[Cochis_Calhoun]

3 hours ago, birdman#12 said:

C'mon......those receivers were below average, the RBs didn't produce anything except Robinson.....and no TE....and the one of the worst head coaches in the NFL........they were a horrible team that was depending on a very young QB.  700 yards in a season for a receiver is 43 yards a game......and Shenault was a rookie that the coaching staff didn't know how to use.  

Not to mention the 30th ranked defense in the league.

It's a really stupid argument to blame Minshew for how bad the Jags were.....

When was the last time we had 3 receivers hit 700 yards?  I'd guess we'd be back at at least Chip Kelly's years?

[nipples]

33 minutes ago, Cochis_Calhoun said:

When was the last time we had 3 receivers hit 700 yards?  I'd guess we'd be back at at least Chip Kelly's years?

When’s the last time we had a QB willing to throw to anyone not named Zach Ertz?

The fact is when you have a TE that catches so many passes, it’s going to take away from some balls to WRs. If you want to include Ertz, the last time the Eagles had 3 receivers with 700+ was 2018. 

[olsilverhair]

If they play hurts, it’s because they want to lose,

[Thing3]

It was refreshing to see us play with a QB that could actually make reads at the line and then make the throws. While we didn't run the ball as well with Minshew...we still ran the ball effectively. I think this game showed us more about how far Hurts has to go then it did about Minshew. If Hurts doesn't play well the next two games (needs to show he can use his head and not just his legs) I wouldn't mind seeing Minshew get the nod against Washington in week 17, especially if Hurts is still banged up. I'd like to see what Minshew can do against a better team than the Jets. Assuming (hoping) we don't bring in another new QB this off season, I think Minshew may be a better place holder at QB next season, if Hurts doesn't progress. He certainly fits the identity we know this team wants to have when we decide on a new franchise QB. For now, Hurts is and should be the starter and it should be his to lose....it's going to be a long bye week!

 

.

[birdman#12]

2 hours ago, Cochis_Calhoun said:

When was the last time we had 3 receivers hit 700 yards?  I'd guess we'd be back at at least Chip Kelly's years?

Who cares?  You think having 3 receivers who have 700 yards is a ticket to winning?.....their defense gave up 31 points a game......

It's ridiculous to blame Minshew for the disaster that was the Jags.....

[mixfijoe]

Hey Iv only been following NFL for about 2 years and still feel like heaps to learn so prob dumb question if this is possible could the eagles take both minshew and hurts into a game? And if so would this be a good idea?

[Big___Al]

On 10/14/2021 at 11:50 PM, Uscg-green said:

Ten days off if the right time to do it

The kid's barely been here 10 days. I'd rather the extra time goes into further developing Hurts.

[Green_Guinness]

44 minutes ago, mixfijoe said:

Hey Iv only been following NFL for about 2 years and still feel like heaps to learn so prob dumb question if this is possible could the eagles take both minshew and hurts into a game? And if so would this be a good idea?

Welcome to the EMB.  Nice to see another member from Australia.  Think we have a few here at the moment.

Do you mean for each of them to play during a game at different times?  If so then sure, a head coach can sub his players in/out as he sees fit, but usually whoever the named starting QB is plays the game unless he gets injured or plays so poorly the HC switches to the backup QB to try and spark the team.  Though, some teams, and this includes the Eagles years ago when they had Randall Cunningham in his rookie season and also last year in Hurts rookie season, will put the backup QB in to run a different style of play (usually referred to as a Wildcat formation or play with a QB who can run the ball well).  So it's possible for both of them to see snaps in the same game.

 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Big___Al said:

The kid's barely been here 10 days. I'd rather the extra time goes into further developing Hurts.

Are you saying Minshew has been here 10 days ??

[Big___Al]

1 hour ago, downundermike said:

Are you saying Minshew has been here 10 days ??

Third string and practice squad don't count.

[mixfijoe]

Thanks heaps. This awsers my questions and yea the nfl is becoming more and more popular over here so it doesn't surprise me

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Big___Al said:

Third string and practice squad don't count.

Flacco was traded 9 weeks ago, so Minshew has been the back up for 9 weeks, been with the team for 4 months.  Not sure where you are going, but your point is totally invalid.

[Vileborg]

Splitting reps after a bye week means we don't want to tip our hat but we're going with Minshew.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Vileborg said:

Splitting reps after a bye week means we don't want to tip our hat but we're going with Minshew.

[MillerTime]

So I voted no earlier in the year but I’m done with the Hurts project.

[Uscg-green]

On 12/15/2021 at 10:24 PM, Big___Al said:

The kid's barely been here 10 days. I'd rather the extra time goes into further developing Hurts.

Why? He's not our future. 

[MF POON]

I think you only go with Minshew if Hurts plays and we lose to the football team.  At that point, the playoffs are technically still a chance, but more than likely we're out (or would we be out?).  Anyway, so the coaches wanting to see what they have with the backup makes sense.  Then you can figure out what moves you want to make depending on how Minshew plays.

[nipples]

1 hour ago, MF POON said:

I think you only go with Minshew if Hurts plays and we lose to the football team.  At that point, the playoffs are technically still a chance, but more than likely we're out (or would we be out?).  Anyway, so the coaches wanting to see what they have with the backup makes sense.  Then you can figure out what moves you want to make depending on how Minshew plays.

Well my argument would be that you have a better chance of actually making the playoffs if you stick with Minshew. 

[MF POON]

1 minute ago, nipples said:

Well my argument would be that you have a better chance of actually making the playoffs if you stick with Minshew. 

I don't think you're wrong/right, as it's your opinion.  Minshew could go out there and throw 4 TDs, with 350+ yards, yet the defense gives up 38 points and we lose. 

Football teams starting QB is out due to covid, and there should be no way we lose as a team.

[Big___Al]

On 12/16/2021 at 9:48 AM, downundermike said:

Flacco was traded 9 weeks ago, so Minshew has been the back up for 9 weeks, been with the team for 4 months.  Not sure where you are going, but your point is totally invalid.

OK, if you want to split hairs; but my point is rather easily discerned.