How do you feel about Hurts as the QB next year

[hukdonfoniks]

4 hours ago, eglz1 said:

I very much doubt Stache has a chance. Not due to skill or ability. He's already been told by Siri that he had no chance of being named the starter this year and that was after the Jets game. If I were him I'd be talking to my agent, asking about requesting a trade. Maybe there's no market but I'd be exploring the possibility.

He can request all he wants but Minshew's not going anywhere.  Not unless someone throws us a great offer that we can't turn down, but that's unlikely because he's a free agent after next year.  And the only way we'd get a great pick for him is if the other team is trading for him as a starter.  Which no one's doing. 

[hukdonfoniks]

9 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

But Hurts shouldn't be the definite starter. He isn't that good. I'm not saying he's bad either but he's not that good that there should be no competition. 

1,000,000 X this

The best Hurts looked all season was when the ball was taken out of his hands and we were running it 40 times a game.  In that particular kind of system in those particular game situations, Hurts can do just fine. 

The second he has to step outside of that and win with his arm?  Well we just saw what happens when he does that, and it's awful.

[kiwieagle]

8 hours ago, brkmsn said:

That's because we all tend to overreact after a negative performance. Since the season is over, he won't get another chance to redeem himself until next season. I wonder if Cardinal fans are questioning Kyler Murray as their franchise QB right now? I mean, his first playoff game was a disaster. 

Sure was but Murray has been putting up great numbers for a couple of years now and is a competent passer. His lowest season passer rating is higher than Hurts. The difference is even more stark when you look at QBR which factors in rushing and discounts garbage time stats which Hurts is the king of. 

[beto_eagles]

wow people are more volatile than Bitcoin. Just compare the results of this poll with the other one that asked a similar question a few weeks ago. 

[kiwieagle]

6 hours ago, pallidrone said:

It is so silly and a huge overreaction to a playoff game that most people already thought the Eagles were overclassed in before they even played.

its not the winning or losing that people saw. You are right Eagles were expected to lose.

But it was the totally inept offence, incapable of moving the ball until the game was out of hand. How easy it was to do by just stacking the box to take away the run, and forcing Hurts to and make the right reads and accurate passes

[NOTW]

1 hour ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

But Hurts shouldn't be the definite starter. He isn't that good. I'm not saying he's bad either but he's not that good that there should be no competition. 

I get you, I thinking how Siri will see it.  I'm sure there would "open competition" going into camp next year especially if they make no roster changes and you have Minshew there.  But Hurts would be the assumed starter and Minshew would have to beat him out and make his case.

This all may be moot if they make changes.  Remove Minshew and add say a 3rd or 4th round draft pick well Hurts is the starter and the draft pick is to develop as a backup.  Add a veteran journeyman like Flacco it's a true backup not real competition.  If they make some move like a trade or draft a QB high, then you have competition.

[Shalodeep]

His last 9 games 

7 touchdowns, 7 interceptions

With only 3 games over 200 yards.

In that same time period Taylor Heinicke 

10 touchdowns, 8 interceptions

With 5 games over 200 yards.

 

At some point those numbers need to mean something, even to the most devoted fan. He gets journeyman numbers.  And that's behind an amazing oline and a tremendous running game. 

In comparison to Cousins who everyone keeps shitting on

15 touchdowns, 5 interceptions

7 games over 200 yards. 

 

 

 

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Shalodeep said:

His last 9 games 

7 touchdowns, 7 interceptions

With only 3 games over 200 yards.

In that same time period Taylor Heinicke 

10 touchdowns, 8 interceptions

With 5 games over 200 yards.

 

At some point those numbers need to mean something, even to the most devoted fan. He gets journeyman numbers.  And that's behind an amazing oline and a tremendous running game. 

In comparison to Cousins who everyone keeps shitting on

15 touchdowns, 5 interceptions

7 games over 200 yards. 

 

 

 

[brkmsn]

1 hour ago, kiwieagle said:

Sure was but Murray has been putting up great numbers for a couple of years now and is a competent passer. His lowest season passer rating is higher than Hurts. The difference is even more stark when you look at QBR which factors in rushing and discounts garbage time stats which Hurts is the king of. 

Murray's lowest passer rating was his rookie year. It was 87.4. Hurts' was 87.2 this season. Comparatively, their situations were a little different. Murray has had vet WRs to throw to in each season. Fitz as a rookie and then Fitz and Hopkins in 2020. Hurts had a group of NFL WRs where Greg Ward was the old man. They were all learning together. Hurts had his struggles and I don't think anybody would suggest that Hurts is the better passer. But Hurts got his first taste of the postseason in his first year as starter and Murray got his first taste as well. Both players struggled with mistakes, but Murray looked rattled all game. 

Murray faced a tougher defense, but Tampa Bay's defense played a great game and, IMO, has better coaching. Tampa schooled Sirianni and Steichen. I'm hoping this group learns from that and expands the passing game next season. I would prefer the team not to have to spend cap space on a FA WR, but I think a seasoned vet WR could really help Hurts grow as a passer. Assuming Hurts goes into 2022 as our starter, it will be interesting to see if he continues to improve. He hasn't had 3 years as a starter yet. But his first (full) year isn't as bad as some are making it seem. 

[c_u_in_tampa]

He's a backup QB. If you think you can win with a backup QB, then bring him back. 

[Shalodeep]

28 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Sadly, someone will justify it and blame someone else....

[kiwieagle]

5 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

Murray's lowest passer rating was his rookie year. It was 87.4. Hurts' was 87.2 this season. Comparatively, their situations were a little different. Murray has had vet WRs to throw to in each season. Fitz as a rookie and then Fitz and Hopkins in 2020. Hurts had a group of NFL WRs where Greg Ward was the old man. They were all learning together. Hurts had his struggles and I don't think anybody would suggest that Hurts is the better passer. But Hurts got his first taste of the postseason in his first year as starter and Murray got his first taste as well. Both players struggled with mistakes, but Murray looked rattled all game. 

Murray faced a tougher defense, but Tampa Bay's defense played a great game and, IMO, has better coaching. Tampa schooled Sirianni and Steichen. I'm hoping this group learns from that and expands the passing game next season. I would prefer the team not to have to spend cap space on a FA WR, but I think a seasoned vet WR could really help Hurts grow as a passer. Assuming Hurts goes into 2022 as our starter, it will be interesting to see if he continues to improve. He hasn't had 3 years as a starter yet. But his first (full) year isn't as bad as some are making it seem. 

Number of things here.

1. That's a big reason why I mentioned QBR as well. 57.7 vs 48.9. The difference in running wont be causing that, if anything Hurts is getting benefit of that so what that says to me and what I saw throughout the year was Hurts did put up a fair amount of his stats in garbage time which gets discounted in QBR but not passer rating 

2. Hurts had some experience last year + benefit of another off-season when comparing their rookie seasons. Hurts had Goedert, Smith and Watkins and Murray had Fitz on the downswing of his career, Kirk and no names TEs 

3. The reason the coaches didn't have an expanded passing game is because of the limitations Hurts at his current level puts on the overall offence. He struggled when asked to do too much earlier in the season and we did better when coaches took the ball from his hands and limited what he was asked to do

I'm not against Hurts as the guy they roll with for another year but I don't think that should be given or that he should stop us from looking for a better alternative if one is available this off season

[brkmsn]

47 minutes ago, Shalodeep said:

His last 9 games 

7 touchdowns, 7 interceptions

With only 3 games over 200 yards.

In that same time period Taylor Heinicke 

10 touchdowns, 8 interceptions

With 5 games over 200 yards.

 

At some point those numbers need to mean something, even to the most devoted fan. He gets journeyman numbers.  And that's behind an amazing oline and a tremendous running game. 

In comparison to Cousins who everyone keeps shitting on

15 touchdowns, 5 interceptions

7 games over 200 yards. 

 

 

 

Context matters.

1 of those games was his worst of the year with 3 INTs. 2 of those INTs bounced through our receiver's hands. 2 were on 4th down. As for the yards, what difference does that make when you have nearly 200 rushing yards on offense as well? He alone had 462 rushing yards and 5 rushing TDs in that span. The team's record was 6-3 in that span. We also faced some of the NFL's top defenses during that span (Broncos, Saints, Bucs).

[brkmsn]

2 minutes ago, kiwieagle said:

2. Hurts had some experience last year + benefit of another off-season when comparing their rookie seasons. Hurts had Goedert, Smith and Watkins and Murray had Fitz on the downswing of his career, Kirk and no names TEs 

I don't think a lot came from the 2020 season. It did give Hurts a chance to get his feet wet as a rookie, but Doug used him differently and those receivers are pretty much all gone. Now, I do think Smith will be special, but we just didn't have that savvy, dependable vet WR. Fitz may have been near the end, but he was still better than anything we had in 2020 or 2021. Kirk is like a slightly more experienced version of Watkins and is the better player currently. We have had the edge at TE over the Cardinals for sure. My point really is that an experienced WR can help a young QB get better. Hurts did not have one. 

 

13 minutes ago, kiwieagle said:

3. The reason the coaches didn't have an expanded passing game is because of the limitations Hurts at his current level puts on the overall offence. He struggled when asked to do too much earlier in the season and we did better when coaches took the ball from his hands and limited what he was asked to do

I totally agree. I think that was beneficial to the team's immediate success. I do think we have to expand his passing responsibilities. A lot will depend on how the offseason goes (regarding Hurts). I expect he will work with all the WRs willing to work on their games. Hopefully, Hurts will also try to improve the areas of his own game that are holding the offense back. Fortunately, he's not afraid to work. 

[Shalodeep]

48 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

Context matters.

1 of those games was his worst of the year with 3 INTs. 2 of those INTs bounced through our receiver's hands. 2 were on 4th down. As for the yards, what difference does that make when you have nearly 200 rushing yards on offense as well? He alone had 462 rushing yards and 5 rushing TDs in that span. The team's record was 6-3 in that span. We also faced some of the NFL's top defenses during that span (Broncos, Saints, Bucs).

Also played new York and washington twice so what's your point? Other QBs don't get interceptions off wide outs hands? Context? He was carried by an offensive line with two HoFers and a left tackle with the talent to rival them. Him running that much isn't something to build on. Like how hard is that to understand. The two qbs I brought up played NFL teams as well and with lesser lines in front of them. He's Tyrod Taylor at best 

[Shalodeep]

10 minutes ago, Shalodeep said:

Also played new York and washington twice so what's your point? Other QBs don't get interceptions off wide outs hands? Context? He was carried by an offensive line with two HoFers and a left tackle with the talent to rival them. Him running that much isn't something to build on. Like how hard is that to understand. The two qbs I brought up played NFL teams as well and with lesser lines in front of them. He's Tyrod Taylor at best 

And before anyone thinks they Tyrod Taylor comparison is off base

2015 3000 20/6. Rush 568 4tds

2016 3000 17/6 rush 580 6tds

[Damanick10]

Not good, but lets give this gimmick offense one more year to see if he can turn into a real QB. We have so many holes on defense in a pretty deep draft we need to retool on that side.

[kiwieagle]

1 hour ago, brkmsn said:

Context matters.

1 of those games was his worst of the year with 3 INTs. 2 of those INTs bounced through our receiver's hands. 2 were on 4th down. As for the yards, what difference does that make when you have nearly 200 rushing yards on offense as well? He alone had 462 rushing yards and 5 rushing TDs in that span. The team's record was 6-3 in that span. We also faced some of the NFL's top defenses during that span (Broncos, Saints, Bucs).

If we are putting context around everything and using the record 6-3 record as an achievement (and lets ignore Buccs and say its 6-2), we should also mention that record is in context of playing teams that are all picking in the top 11. The one exception was the Saints and we played their 3rd string QB who was 0-4 vs 9-4 when their 1st and 2nd string QB played. Further, we got lucky facing these really bad teams due to QBs being out which meant Hurts was going up against Gilbert and Fromm/Glennon for two of those games. Re. facing good defences, the performance against the Saints D was definitely impressive but in that Broncos game after a stellar 1st half from Hurts, the second was very meh and we gave them multiple opportunities to come back in the game, and ultimately we got bailed out by a defensive TD. 

Heinicke is the right sort of comparison for where Hurts is currently at. I think Hurts is clearly better, particularly in three important areas 1) Protecting the football 2) His clunkers which have been pretty bad over that span have still not quite been as awful as some of Heinicke 3) More dynamic runner. But the gap there isn't that big, acknowledging Hurts' age here and relative to Taylor a higher ceiling. 

[brkmsn]

27 minutes ago, Shalodeep said:

Also played new York and washington twice so what's your point? Other QBs don't get interceptions off wide outs hands? Context? He was carried by an offensive line with two HoFers and a left tackle with the talent to rival them. Him running that much isn't something to build on. Like how hard is that to understand. The two qbs I brought up played NFL teams as well and with lesser lines in front of them. He's Tyrod Taylor at best 

Context matters because we were simply using a game plan that was designed to control the clock, keep the score lower, keep our own shaky defense off the field and rested as much as possible. It did play to Hurts' strengths and minimized exposing his weaknesses (which he has). What situations were those other QBs you named in? Were they winning games or losing games? Were they passing out of necessity or because it was the game plan? Washington may have had a bad season, but their defense would likely be one of the Top NFL defenses if they had a competent offense. The Giants are streaky on defense, but they had one really good defensive performance in the 2 games against us. This kind of thing shouldn't be surprising if you've watched NFC East Football.

I somewhat agree about the running. It's not something a team should try to sustain moving forward. But it can help a young QB while he learns to become a better passer. It helped McNabb. It helped Cunningham. It helped Vick. It helped Josh Allen. 

[kiwieagle]

Everyone is clamouring for massive defensive upgrades and for Gannon to go but over that same period that some on here want to give Hurts major credit for winning, the defensive allowed 16.6 points and 288.8 yards per game i.e. top 3 defence numbers (Week 8 - 17 so ignoring the Dallas back-up game)

But are they a good defence. Hell no! Do they need to add a whole lot more talent. Hell yes!

My point is that the opposition we faced over that time matters. Matters a lot in fact - that is by far one the biggest reason for our late season surge and making the playoffs. Was a fun ride but bit of fools gold - this needs to be factored into all evaluations this off-season

[brkmsn]

5 minutes ago, kiwieagle said:

If we are putting context around everything and using the record 6-3 record as an achievement (and lets ignore Buccs and say its 6-2), we should also mention that record is in context of playing teams that are all picking in the top 11. The one exception was the Saints and we played their 3rd string QB who was 0-4 vs 9-4 when their 1st and 2nd string QB played. Further, we got lucky facing these really bad teams due to QBs being out which meant Hurts was going up against Gilbert and Fromm/Glennon for two of those games. Re. facing good defences, the performance against the Saints D was definitely impressive but in that Broncos game after a stellar 1st half from Hurts, the second was very meh and we gave them multiple opportunities to come back in the game, and ultimately we got bailed out by a defensive TD. 

Heinicke is the right sort of comparison for where Hurts is currently at. I think Hurts is clearly better, particularly in three important areas 1) Protecting the football 2) His clunkers which have been pretty bad over that span have still not quite been as awful as some of Heinicke 3) More dynamic runner. But the gap there isn't that big, acknowledging Hurts' age here and relative to Taylor a higher ceiling. 

Hurts doesn't go up against those teams' QBs. He goes up against those teams' defenses. Then those teams' QBs get to face our defense. A lot of QBs had some of their best games against our defense. Our defensive weaknesses were minimized when we controlled the clock with the run. 

When all is said and done, most sites, bloggers, publications, etc... have Hurts as a middle tier QB. Most of those same people / sites predicted he would be near the bottom. I believe there's reason to be mildly optimistic. We tend to dwell on our own players' faults and seem to ignore those of other teams' players. That's why I brought up Murray earlier. When everybody was trashing Wentz last year for "hero ball," you didn't hear them bashing Mahomes for the same type of plays.* One big difference is that Mahomes has teammates that bail him out most of the time. Our most productive receiver last year was Fulgham.

 

* Disclaimer: Mahomes is a much better QB than Wentz. Both live or die with "hero ball," though. 

[brkmsn]

7 minutes ago, kiwieagle said:

Everyone is clamouring for massive defensive upgrades and for Gannon to go but over that same period that some on here want to give Hurts major credit for winning, the defensive allowed 16.6 points and 288.8 yards per game i.e. top 3 defence numbers (Week 8 - 17 so ignoring the Dallas back-up game)

But are they a good defence. Hell no! Do they need to add a whole lot more talent. Hell yes!

My point is that the opposition we faced over that time matters. Matters a lot in fact - that is by far one the biggest reason for our late season surge and making the playoffs. Was a fun ride but bit of fools gold - this needs to be factored into all evaluations this off-season

Like pointed out in arguments rebutting mine --- All teams get to play lesser teams during the season. You don't think Tom Brady gained a lot of confidence getting to play the Jets, Bills and Dolphins twice every year? Anyway, teams are expected to beat lesser teams. Most good stats come from beating lesser teams. That is football. Players tend to have their worst statistical performances when facing better teams. Last year, we were the worst team in the NFC East --- the only division that didn't have a team with a winning record. This year, we were one of two teams in our division with a winning record. 

Even when winning, you can see plenty of areas our team needs to improve in. Hurts needs to see the field better. Our receivers all could improve in various areas. Our defense needs more playmakers. Our special teams needs a complete overhaul aside from Elliot. We aren't there yet --- not by a long shot --- but we are moving in a positive direction. We will need many of our young players to make large strides in the next year in order to be more than just a middle-tier team. Hurts is one of those guys that has to continue to improve. 

[Shalodeep]

4 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

Hurts doesn't go up against those teams' QBs. He goes up against those teams' defenses. Then those teams' QBs get to face our defense. A lot of QBs had some of their best games against our defense. Our defensive weaknesses were minimized when we controlled the clock with the run. 

When all is said and done, most sites, bloggers, publications, etc... have Hurts as a middle tier QB. Most of those same people / sites predicted he would be near the bottom. I believe there's reason to be mildly optimistic. We tend to dwell on our own players' faults and seem to ignore those of other teams' players. That's why I brought up Murray earlier. When everybody was trashing Wentz last year for "hero ball," you didn't hear them bashing Mahomes for the same type of plays.* One big difference is that Mahomes has teammates that bail him out most of the time. Our most productive receiver last year was Fulgham.

 

* Disclaimer: Mahomes is a much better QB than Wentz. Both live or die with "hero ball," though. 

Lower middle tier is one step above "just a guy" in the NFL . Mahomes, Burrow, Herbert, Murray, Jackson, M. Jones, Dak, Watson, Allen are examples of the next big things in the NFL with Brady, Aaron, Wilson (still quite a few years left to go). Then you have your Carr, Cousins, Stafford, Tannehill type who aren't everything but get numbers kinda guys.  Then the above just a guy group is like Wentz, Hurts, Tua, Teddy, jimmy G. The we don't know group Lawrence, Lance, Fields type.

Tyrod, Heinicke, Darnold, D. Jones, Dalton, Goff, Fitz who will float around getting gigs forever types.  Could put hurts in the we don't know group, but he got a full year of starts with the same coach. Lawrence was fed to the wolves on a team who tossed the coach out the door. Lance and fields weren't given a season, and may get a shot next year. If his ceiling is the tua, teddy range....are you okay with that? I don't see with his poor footwork and decision making going much higher

 

 

[kiwieagle]

2 hours ago, brkmsn said:

Hurts doesn't go up against those teams' QBs. He goes up against those teams' defenses. Then those teams' QBs get to face our defense. A lot of QBs had some of their best games against our defense. Our defensive weaknesses were minimized when we controlled the clock with the run. 

When all is said and done, most sites, bloggers, publications, etc... have Hurts as a middle tier QB. Most of those same people / sites predicted he would be near the bottom. I believe there's reason to be mildly optimistic. We tend to dwell on our own players' faults and seem to ignore those of other teams' players. That's why I brought up Murray earlier. When everybody was trashing Wentz last year for "hero ball," you didn't hear them bashing Mahomes for the same type of plays.* One big difference is that Mahomes has teammates that bail him out most of the time. Our most productive receiver last year was Fulgham.

* Disclaimer: Mahomes is a much better QB than Wentz. Both live or die with "hero ball," though. 

The quality of the opposing offence and QB matters because it influences how many points we need to put to get a W. Furthermore, it totally impacts on offensive strategy. Say in the second Giant's game, the fact that the putrid Giants offence could only put up 3 points in the first half allowed the Eagles to stick with their run-centric offence well into the second half despite Hurt's awful first half. Playing bad oppositions means that we didn't ever really have to rely on Hurts slinging the ball all over the field to keep up with the other team or dig ourselves out of a hole which where his weaknesses are.

It goes both ways, our defence weakness was minimised because we played crap opposition and played ball control offence. Hurts' weakness was minimised because we played crap opposition and the defence wouldn't let said QBs score points so we didn't need Hurts to win games with his arm.

I agree Hurts play this year relatively was somewhere around middle / just below middle-of-the pack, say 15-20 range. QB play in general this year across the league was pretty poor. Having said that the list below him includes all the rookes (bar Mac Jones who'd be in the same range) but those guys have higher ceilings.

[brkmsn]

2 hours ago, Shalodeep said:

If his ceiling is the tua, teddy range....are you okay with that? I don't see with his poor footwork and decision making going much higher

It's hard to answer that question. I don't think we ever really know what a player's ceiling is. JaMarcus Russell was projected to have a very high ceiling but he had no desire to work to get better as a player. Tom Brady was considered a low ceiling prospect --- but we know now just how competitive he is and how hard he works to be great. Eli was never the level of QB Peyton was, but has the same amount of Super Bowl wins.

Would I prefer to have the best QB in the NFL? Yes. Do I think teams need a QB to be a top 10 QB in order to win it all? No.