GDT: Philadelphia Eagles @ Denver Broncos, 11-14-21 4:25PM EST

[ThinkGreen]

Sanders coming back is going to be like Owens coming back for the SB, although the stakes are lower.

2 minutes ago, shlo said:

Seems like it's for Gainwell to get "hurt" in practice this week.

He had some great plays today.

[EazyEaglez]

A great week for the birds and a bad one at the same time considering the Colts, the Dolphins, and them all won. 😂

[Infam]

20 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

A great week for the birds and a bad one at the same time considering the Colts, the Dolphins, and them all won. 😂

Sucks they all won, but this felt like an important win for us to me.

[EazyEaglez]

4 minutes ago, Infam said:

Sucks they all won, but this felt like an important win for us to me.

Like I mentioned earlier this team didn’t get their 4th win till week 14 last year. The team from last year only beat the Saints as a winning team. Hurts has won more games this year than the guy people were wishing was back here just a week ago last year so there is improvement. We wanted to see improvement and so far the quarterback and coach have been doing just that. This team is better than last years team. That is a positive to build on. 

[kiwieagle]

Great team win - offence was efficient in the first half and closed the game with a strong run game. Defence played excellent situational football - red zone, 3rd downs and of course the big play TD + FG block on ST. Best of all, was that first half from Hurts - its the best he has looked at any point in his career. We need to see more of that.

Whilst that was the good, there was a couple of concerning things:

1. Hurts decision making and play in 3rd qtr - The INT was terrible and he should have had another. Two awful passes and horrible situational awareness. No harm done this game as the D bailed him out big time with the long fumble return

2. This is the first time the game played out like Gannon's scheme is supposed to work - limit big plays, and make timely plays to get off the field and limit TDs to FGs. But this whole approach is just too soft for my liking - i think against the better offences, you need to put pressure on them and create negative plays. Our scheme just isn't set up to do that.

The team continues to grow before our eyes. No doubt we are being helped by a soft schedule (just as we were hurt by a pretty difficult schedule to begin the season). But there aren't any games left the rest of the way that we couldn't / shouldn't win, especially given Cowboys may well be resting their players. I think we will win more games than we lose from here on out with an outside chance of playoffs - key for that is just if this young team can avoid a couple of let down games.

[EazyEaglez]

49 minutes ago, ThinkGreen said:

Sanders coming back is going to be like Owens coming back for the SB, although the stakes are lower.

He had some great plays today.

Meh. Owens completely dominated that year and was head and shoulders better than the rest of the Eagles receivers. The Eagles are a better run team now than they were with Sanders. Not really the same at all. 

[kiwieagle]

1 hour ago, Dawkamania06 said:

Great win!  With the running game doing so well .. Im afraid that when Miles Sanders comes back the running game is gonna go to hell. Howard and Scott are doing so well running the ball. Sanders is just gonna mess everything up.

Maybe, but I'd like to see him get his shot with the coaching staff actually committed to running the ball. He was off to a great start in that game against the Raiders before getting hurt which really was the first game we let our OL and RBs get into a rhythm. Think his big play ability could actually be a better compliment to Howard's power than Scott. Key for him will be just hits the holes like he is supposed too and not try and do too much east/west to limit negative plays.

[Random Reglar]

1 hour ago, xstonr said:

Hurts is probably better than any of the qb coming out in the draft. We should use the picks on D.  

Well. the problem is, even if you don't think Hurts is probably better than all the QBs,  you don't know for sure which one is definitely better.    Hurts is doing better than most of the QBs picked in the first round from 18-21.   You could end up with Darnold, Rosen, Haskins,  those guys were close to total failures.  Other choices are still playing but not doing better than Hurts, and there are only 5 of 17 who are doing better than Hurts.

The defense was 21st in points per game before this game.   Make the defense great, and Hurts is good enough, and he's cheap.  Use the QB savings on improving everywhere else. 

To me, the Eagles are in fine, fine shape going forward.  Keep Hurts until it becomes time to pay him a ton of money.  Apparently you can't pay the QB what he's worth if you want to keep him.  You have to pay that QB roughly the same amount as the most expensive QBs.  It's either yes or no.   You can get the other guys QB for almost nothing.   They have to pay 40 M to keep him,  and if they don't,  you can get him for 10 M or less.   It's just one of the really stupid features of the NFL,  but it seems to work that way.  

[gohabsgo]

three 1st rounders is looking pretty good for us.  I'm not sure what the picks will be, but maybe 5-10, 10-20, and 20-30 if the colts get hot. 

[Random Reglar]

32 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

Like I mentioned earlier this team didn’t get their 4th win till week 14 last year. The team from last year only beat the Saints as a winning team. Hurts has won more games this year than the guy people were wishing was back here just a week ago last year so there is improvement. We wanted to see improvement and so far the quarterback and coach have been doing just that. This team is better than last years team. That is a positive to build on. 

Absolutely.   Subtracted a 30 Million QB salary,  have a great pick from that trade, and are better than last year.  

Hurts definitely looks good enough to keep his job through his contract, while the Eagles add top players around him.  After 2023,  you're probably debating whether to sign Hurts for big money.  I generally like running QBs on their rookie contracts.   Cheap is good, and "face of the franchise" has nothing to do with winning football games. 

[toolg]

1 hour ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

If that's Smith hurt and not 100% then damn!

LOL. Yeah, he’s likely not hurt.  But he played the game wearing that bulky arm brace thing. 

[Southparkeagles]

1 hour ago, xstonr said:

Hurts is probably better than any of the qb coming out in the draft. We should use the picks on D.  

If you can bolster the D in critical spots with those picks, then there is no reason to move away from Hurts for next season. It’ll be the ultimate "prove it” season for Hurts, but with key pieces resolved on D, it’ll be worth foregoing a mediocre QB pick or QB veteran trade. The rebuilding process will eventually come to fruition even if Hurts plays like he is now. 

[proveagle]

21 minutes ago, Random Reglar said:

To me, the Eagles are in fine, fine shape going forward.  Keep Hurts until it becomes time to pay him a ton of money.  Apparently you can't pay the QB what he's worth if you want to keep him.  You have to pay that QB roughly the same amount as the most expensive QBs.  It's either yes or no.   You can get the other guys QB for almost nothing.   They have to pay 40 M to keep him,  and if they don't,  you can get him for 10 M or less.   It's just one of the really stupid features of the NFL,  but it seems to work that way.  

This is the key.  Roll with Hurts and build around him until you have to pay him the big fat cap killing QB deal.  Hopefully he matures by that point and is worth the deal to sign long-term.  If not, that is the time to find a new QB.  Can't afford in this league to sink huge contracts into guys that aren't franchise players.

[EazyEaglez]

4 minutes ago, Random Reglar said:

Absolutely.   Subtracted a 30 Million QB salary,  have a great pick from that trade, and are better than last year.  

Hurts definitely looks good enough to keep his job through his contract, while the Eagles add top players around him.  After 2023,  you're probably debating whether to sign Hurts for big money.  I generally like running QBs on their rookie contracts.   Cheap is good, and "face of the franchise" has nothing to do with winning football games. 

Build the roster and worry about financial contracts later. Barnett needs to be replaced. They could use a playmaking safety and linebacker. They could use another wide receiver. Brooks  ant stay healthy. Cox looks old. Just so many more needs to worry about, and right now they’re still dealing with the cap hit from the guy playing for the Colts right now. Let’s see what Hurts plays like with more talent around him and while he continues to improve. On a side note I’m not a fan of paying quarterbacks the big contracts, because I don’t feel like it really equates to winning games. 

[ThinkGreen]

37 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

Meh. Owens completely dominated that year and was head and shoulders better than the rest of the Eagles receivers. The Eagles are a better run team now than they were with Sanders. Not really the same at all. 

They won the divisional playoff and NFC championship without him. 

[EazyEaglez]

Just now, ThinkGreen said:

They won the divisional playoff and NFC championship without him. 

Not really cause the guy who were in there were better than him. None of those other receivers have shined like both Scott and Howard have while Sanders was out. I’ll add Sanders career so far hasn’t been nearly as good as Howard’s is. 

[Random Reglar]

2 hours ago, Swoop said:

We're a much better team running, but man I wish we could get some consistency out of Hurts. 

At the very least, he's staying in the pocket and using the rest of the field a bit more. He still needs to run less and be consistent. 

no, not really.   he doesn't need to run less at all.   An argument could be made that it would be good if he ran more.  About consistency,   it would be best for all teams if their QBs never made any mistakes.  Hurts makes some, and watching Sunday Night Football, I watched Mahomes overthrow a WR in the end zone.  It would be good if he was perfect,  but it isn't necessary for him to be.  

[EazyEaglez]

15 minutes ago, Random Reglar said:

no, not really.   he doesn't need to run less at all.   An argument could be made that it would be good if he ran more.  About consistency,   it would be best for all teams if their QBs never made any mistakes.  Hurts makes some, and watching Sunday Night Football, I watched Mahomes overthrow a WR in the end zone.  It would be good if he was perfect,  but it isn't necessary for him to be.  

Completely unrealistic for any quarterback to always be perfect. It’s hilarious for anyone to expect perfection considering the last guy wasn’t close to perfect at all and was prone to make some boneheaded mistakes with the football in the past. Heck when was the last time the Eagles had an elite accuracy quarterback at all? The current league leaders in INTs are Darnold, Burrow, and Mahomes. All are in double digits, but at least two of those guys people would love to have as their quarterback. Consistency and perfection aren’t realistic in the NFL. We should want to see our quarterback improve. So far 14 starts into his career we are seeing improvement. Someone earlier wrote the Eagles style of play won’t win if that can’t throw the ball 50 times. Well just this past week two quarterbacks threw over 40 times and didn’t win. 

[Random Reglar]

23 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

Build the roster and worry about financial contracts later. Barnett needs to be replaced. They could use a playmaking safety and linebacker. They could use another wide receiver. Brooks  ant stay healthy. Cox looks old. Just so many more needs to worry about, and right now they’re still dealing with the cap hit from the guy playing for the Colts right now. Let’s see what Hurts plays like with more talent around him and while he continues to improve. On a side note I’m not a fan of paying quarterbacks the big contracts, because I don’t feel like it really equates to winning games. 

big money spend on QBs means big money is not spent elsewhere.   Or that money could be saved, used later for a QB, perhaps.

I'm in agreement with you about other needs.   I'd put it slightly differently.  Defense over offense, which is what you're saying, mostly,  but I'd put it as Best High Sparq Super Athletic Freak Beast Available.  If it doesn't match up exactly with what the needs are seen as,  I'm good with that.    I like Faalele,  Mailata's twin who has been playing OL in college.  Slot the new massive OL in there somewhere.  There will other players showing up who have the great size speed and the rest of the measurables in addition to being solid players.     I'd be looking out for the craziest measurables.  The top player to me last year was Oweh, who was taken by the Ravens with 1/31 or something like that.  I'm looking for the crazy 1% type, and if it means there are no sacks, but good enough for Big10 awards, that's fine with me.  The best athletes, crazy outliers.  Impossible types. 

[EazyEaglez]

2 minutes ago, Random Reglar said:

big money spend on QBs means big money is not spent elsewhere.   Or that money could be saved, used later for a QB, perhaps.

I'm in agreement with you about other needs.   I'd put it slightly differently.  Defense over offense, which is what you're saying, mostly,  but I'd put it as Best High Sparq Super Athletic Freak Beast Available.  If it doesn't match up exactly with what the needs are seen as,  I'm good with that.    I like Faalele,  Mailata's twin who has been playing OL in college.  Slot the new massive OL in there somewhere.  There will other players showing up who have the great size speed and the rest of the measurables in addition to being solid players.     I'd be looking out for the craziest measurables.  The top player to me last year was Oweh, who was taken by the Ravens with 1/31 or something like that.  I'm looking for the crazy 1% type, and if it means there are no sacks, but good enough for Big10 awards, that's fine with me.  The best athletes, crazy outliers.  Impossible types. 

I just want guys who can play. I don’t want Howie to overthink this stuff. Go get some guys who can make plays. I do believe the defense needs to be improved and would be perfectly fine if Howie used all three firsts on the defensive side of the ball. 

[Random Reglar]

2 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

I just want guys who can play. I don’t want Howie to overthink this stuff. Go get some guys who can make plays. I do believe the defense needs to be improved and would be perfectly fine if Howie used all three firsts on the defensive side of the ball. 

It seems to be easier to identify, for me at least, the crazy top athletes,  than it is for the average NFL front office to identify college players who can play in the NFL.  

To me, overthinking it means finding some excuse not to take the crazy great athlete.  

It sounds more like you're being neutral and non ideological,  just caring that they're good.  I'd be good with all 3 being D, and also if they weren't.  But the focus should be on defense. 

[Swoop]

37 minutes ago, Random Reglar said:

no, not really.   he doesn't need to run less at all.   An argument could be made that it would be good if he ran more.  About consistency,   it would be best for all teams if their QBs never made any mistakes.  Hurts makes some, and watching Sunday Night Football, I watched Mahomes overthrow a WR in the end zone.  It would be good if he was perfect,  but it isn't necessary for him to be.  

He ran the ball 14 times today. He should not be taking off that much and it would be ludicrous to have him run 15-20 times a game. He's a quarterback, not a running back. That's a good way to get him injured.

As for your last point, who said he needs to be perfect? Who said it was necessary? Asking for consistency is demanding perfection?

And please, Mahomes and Hurts don't belong in the same sentence. Mahomes is an MVP and Super Bowl winner. At the rate he's going, a Hall of Famer. Him missing some throws isn't comparable to what Hurts misses in any capacity.

[Portyansky]

1 hour ago, Swoop said:

He ran the ball 14 times today. He should not be taking off that much and it would be ludicrous to have him run 15-20 times a game. He's a quarterback, not a running back. That's a good way to get him injured.

As for your last point, who said he needs to be perfect? Who said it was necessary? Asking for consistency is demanding perfection?

And please, Mahomes and Hurts don't belong in the same sentence. Mahomes is an MVP and Super Bowl winner. At the rate he's going, a Hall of Famer. Him missing some throws isn't comparable to what Hurts misses in any capacity.

I believe out of those 14.... 6 were just him running away from pressure. 

[Outlaw]

2 hours ago, kiwieagle said:

Maybe, but I'd like to see him get his shot with the coaching staff actually committed to running the ball. He was off to a great start in that game against the Raiders before getting hurt which really was the first game we let our OL and RBs get into a rhythm. Think his big play ability could actually be a better compliment to Howard's power than Scott. Key for him will be just hits the holes like he is supposed too and not try and do too much east/west to limit negative plays.

I agree. When Miles comes back, I want to see Howard and him as 1a/1b with Scott mixing in here and there as a change up and Gainwell being in there for obvious passing downs. Get rid of one of our 8 LBers of which only 2-3 are viable NFL players. Our oline is built to get to the 2nd level and run block. Mailata and Dickerson is a lot of beef to run behind. This team has finally found its identity, and I’m enjoying the show. 
 

Any news on Goedert?

[Talonblood]

Look at all these Eagles fans in Denver... freekin awesome!