20 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Who’s lining up to get one of these?  
 

 

Awful

1 minute ago, NCiggles said:

Awful

Agreed. Draft hats are awful this year...again.

1 hour ago, hputenis said:

It's this.  There's countless evidence of Watkins along with Smith and Goedert running wide open on their routes with Hurts never seeing them.  It's not once or twice a game either.  It's constant, and he does not have the confidence to throw the ball on time, and his arm strength is too weak to make up for his lack of decision making.  If he had the ability to stand in the pocket and actually throw the ball on time, instead of wincing and running around in circles, his arm strength wouldn't matter.   This is something I was patient with at first, but we're 21 games into his career, and he arguably regressed in all of these skill sets.  To say Hurts does not hinder the development of his receivers is laughable.  He negatively impacts every one of them and their development because he's bad at every aspect of the position.  Except for running!  So actually I take that back.  Devonta Smith will totally ascend as a blocker for his next payday!  

I watched all the games, and this is simply made up BS. Sure, he missed some open reads, so does every QB, and it's typical of young QBs in their first year starting, they've got a mental checklist they're going through and HCs tend to limit their options. I've seen plenty of young QBs over the years, and most struggle in the NFL - look at Peyton's first season. It took Eli six seasons to develop into an average to above average QB.

Which is why I think y'all are full of crap. We'll know if Hurts can develop this season, with a year of starting under his belt, second season in the same scheme, an offseason without COVID interruptions to work on his flaws - if he doesn't show significant improvement THEN you move on. As one of those links point out, Burrow was one of the worst deep ball QBs in the NFL in his first season, when he was 24 years old. His NY/A jumped from 5.72 to 7.51, QBR from 48.5 to 54.3 last year. Now it helped to have Chase, but also helped to have that year under his belt.

The team is rebuilding, it still needs a half dozen quality young starters and a lot of young depth before it's a serious SB contender, regardless of the QB.

So there's absolutely no reason to reach for a QB like Pickett, who's unlikely to be as good as Hurts (check the record of the QBs taken after the top ten the past decade, which is where Pickett should go, does anyone think he's more talented than say Mac Jones?

10 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Howie said in his presser that they didn't want to bring in free agents that would impede their first round picks from seeing the field.  

Does that mean they are holding WR2 open?  CB2, LB, and Safety?

I think a 1st round pick at CB is why we havent signed Nelson yet.

LB has been adequately addressed in free agency.

WR theyve tried to address, but at this point I can see them leaving it open for a draft pick.

Safety or DE would seem to be the other.

CB, S, WR, DE. And you can hit them all within the first 2 rounds. 

5 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

1) the AAC is absolutely a smaller conference. In fact, I dont think you can go any smaller in d1 

2) We're at the point where you can argue that the Big 12 and the Pac 12 are "smaller" conferences when compared to the SEC/Big 10

Watching draft after draft, I'm at the point if the Eagles ONLY DRAFTED SEC/Big 10 players they'd have a top 10 roster year in and year out

 

 

The conferences in D1 and possibly how they'd be ranked in terms of player talent:

1-SEC

2-BIG10

3-ACC

4 through 6-any combo of BIG12, PAC10, and AAC

7 through 9-any combo of CUSA, Mountain West, and Sun Belt

10-MAC

So yeah, you can go smaller than the AAC.

Yes, the SEC is the elite conference in college football.  They are head and shoulders above the others.  I wouldn't say the other conferences that used to be able to churn out powerhouse teams on a consistent level are now smaller.  Enough kids sign with an SEC school probably with the thought it will give them the best chance to make it to the NFL due to having great coaching staffs with money behind them, facilities, practicing vs top tier talent, playing vs top tier talent, and national exposure.

And while I would like to see the Eagles draft more players from the SEC and BIG10 because that's where most of the talent is, you can't pass up on a player from a small school just because he comes from a smaller school.  If that player is worthy then you draft him.  There are some out there who will be good NFL players who don't come from the SEC or BIG10.

 

8 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

Don't all go trading Jalen Hurts away at once now

 

Nailed it. 

1 hour ago, RLC said:

Reagor & Jones were HR swings IMO. Jones pre-achilles was a double, but once he had the achilles for a CB it became a high-risk situation. Jefferson was always the "safer" prospect than Reagor because of his ability to be a good slot WR.

I agree with your point that Howie is willing to take risks. He's just not willing to take risks at low-priority positions.

I am not sure Jones was ever a double.  A huge issue for him was an inability to add muscle.  Then he seemed to have almost chronic hamstring issues.   When folks complain about Scott’s contract the $3.6 million contract the Seahawks just gave Jones comes to mind. M

2 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

I think a 1st round pick at CB is why we havent signed Nelson yet.

LB has been adequately addressed in free agency.

WR theyve tried to address, but at this point I can see them leaving it open for a draft pick.

Safety or DE would seem to be the other.

CB, S, WR, DE. And you can hit them all within the first 2 rounds. 

I agree, though I would also put DT in there. They may feel with the youth of Epps, Chachere, Vincent and Wallace to stand pat at S and see if any of these guys develop. Other than Hamilton and Hill I wouldn't go R1 on a S. If they trade back in the first and pick up an additional R2 pick I think all of these can be addressed.

31 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

No Dyami Brown, no Dazz Newsome, no Javonte Williams, no Michael Carter.  North Carolina isn't a program that can fill those positions like the powerhouse schools.

Why he defaulted to taking off and running, trying to do it all himself is a relevant question to ask.

Yes, but they have to wonder if the drop in accuracy and increase in interceptions was just a result of talent loss at WR.  I bet some team comes away back in love with Howell.  Panthers, maybe. 

3 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

I agree, though I would also put DT in there. They may feel with the youth of Epps, Chachere, Vincent and Wallace to stand pat at S and see if any of these guys develop. Other than Hamilton and Hill I wouldn't go R1 on a S. If they trade back in the first and pick up an additional R2 pick I think all of these can be addressed.

I don't think their approach to creating room for picks is limited to their first rounders.  I would see them targeting a LB or S (or anywhere, in fact) on day two with the intent of letting them play.

21 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

I think LB is still somewhat unlikely.  Not sure what they're paying Kyzir White, but it would appear that Edwards and White would get most of the starter snaps for 2022.

I'd love to see a first round safety but I'd put the best odds at DL, WR, and CB being the first 3 picks.

I'd rather with the first 3 picks (assuming they will still have them) that they go any 3 of DE, DT, CB, and S.  The WRs on Day 2 & 3 are better value than the DTs and the DTs in R1 are better value than the WRs, IMO.  DT is a position we need to add young quality talent.  DE has better depth if one of the R1 talents doesn't fall to us by our picks that we could still get a good player in R2-4.  CB we could go Booth or Elam in R1 and there's some good depth there as well.  S I'd be surprised if they draft one in R1, but another position with depth into Day 2 & 3.

I see what you're saying that this is what the Eagles most likely do because they're the Eagles.  I'm just not keen on any of the WRs enough to draft one in R1.

 

11 minutes ago, austinfan said:

I watched all the games, and this is simply made up BS. Sure, he missed some open reads, so does every QB, and it's typical of young QBs in their first year starting, they've got a mental checklist they're going through and HCs tend to limit their options. I've seen plenty of young QBs over the years, and most struggle in the NFL - look at Peyton's first season. It took Eli six seasons to develop into an average to above average QB.

Which is why I think y'all are full of crap. We'll know if Hurts can develop this season, with a year of starting under his belt, second season in the same scheme, an offseason without COVID interruptions to work on his flaws - if he doesn't show significant improvement THEN you move on. As one of those links point out, Burrow was one of the worst deep ball QBs in the NFL in his first season, when he was 24 years old. His NY/A jumped from 5.72 to 7.51, QBR from 48.5 to 54.3 last year. Now it helped to have Chase, but also helped to have that year under his belt.

The team is rebuilding, it still needs a half dozen quality young starters and a lot of young depth before it's a serious SB contender, regardless of the QB.

So there's absolutely no reason to reach for a QB like Pickett, who's unlikely to be as good as Hurts (check the record of the QBs taken after the top ten the past decade, which is where Pickett should go, does anyone think he's more talented than say Mac Jones?

So you think Hurts has shown similar flashes of a Peyton Manning or Joe Burrow in their early years to warrant Hurts getting another year to "develop"? 

Based on what? I get maybe not liking Pickett or any of the other QB's coming out of the draftr this year, but what you are selling along the way, smells like it came out of a fertilizer plant

Either he's saying goodbye or we just gave him more money

45 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

I get the analogy.  But again, that’s suggesting that Reagor had a chance at being a star.  It was more like he swung when the they intentionally walked him.  There was no chance that pick was a good one.  

I couldn't agree more... but he was clearly trying to be smarter than anyone.

19 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Which is why I think y'all are full of crap.

Gotta love how you make this statement, but you are full of crap quite a bit, and you never address it when called out.

You said O linemen are older due to redshirting, fact is only 2 of the top 15 prospects this year redshirted.

1 minute ago, Green_Guinness said:

I'd rather with the first 3 picks (assuming they will still have them) that they go any 3 of DE, DT, CB, and S.  The WRs on Day 2 & 3 are better value than the DTs and the DTs in R1 are better value than the WRs, IMO.  DT is a position we need to add young quality talent.  DE has better depth if one of the R1 talents doesn't fall to us by our picks that we could still get a good player in R2-4.  CB we could go Booth or Elam in R1 and there's some good depth there as well.  S I'd be surprised if they draft one in R1, but another position with depth into Day 2 & 3.

I see what you're saying that this is what the Eagles most likely do because they're the Eagles.  I'm just not keen on any of the WRs enough to draft one in R1.

 

I just don’t see the point in drafting a WR at all. On any given play, our QB goes through one read. So you have a decoy WR, an actual WR and Goedert. It’s not pick your poison, it’s follow the script. So having more WRs doesn’t help. Watkins and Smith are fine for now. Plus, passing isn’t really something we lean on. In at least six games last year we had less than 100 yards passing going into the fourth Quarter. Let get players at positions we actually use 

1 hour ago, RLC said:

Jefferson was always the "safer" prospect than Reagor because of his ability to be a good slot WR.

Jefferson was the most pro ready route runner coming out that year, and the only a slot receiver talk was nonsense.  Jefferson was the best WR in the class and it has now been proven it wasn't even close.

3 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Jefferson was the most pro ready route runner coming out that year, and the only a slot receiver talk was nonsense.  Jefferson was the best WR in the class and it has now been proven it wasn't even close.

 

13 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

I don't think their approach to creating room for picks is limited to their first rounders.  I would see them targeting a LB or S (or anywhere, in fact) on day two with the intent of letting them play.

Yes I meant if they trade back with a CIN for example to 31 + 63 they could have 15, 19, 31, 51, 63 and address DE, DT, CB, WR, S. That would give them 6 top-100 picks.

Yes please

 

10 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

the AAC is no where near the big12 and the Pac12. '

The AAC is on line with CUSA/Mt.West. 

Yes, you can pass up kids who play in the AAC. They're literally going against UPS drivers 8 out of 9 weeks. 

I got into an argument about the Linerbacker from Utah.... A defensive player...from the pac 12... HARD PASSSSSSSS

It's a fools errand to simply pass on a player due to the conference they played in.  Are there more elite players in the SEC and BIG10 and even the ACC, BIG12, and PAC10 than there are in the other conferences?  Sure there are.  But there are players from those smaller conferences/schools who can and have translated to the NFL.

Here's an example.  Out of the top receivers by number of receptions this past season, 4 of the top 6 came from these smaller conferences you belittle:

Cooper Kupp, Eastern Washington

Davante Adams, Fresno St.

Tyreek Hill, West Alabama

Diontae Johnson, Toledo

I'm not going to dig deeper and do all the other positions, but this is good sample to show that you can't simply dismiss a player due to what conference/school they come from.  There's enough diamonds in the rough out there every draft.  Sure, the SEC kids are usually the safer picks and the small conference/school players are more boom/bust and riskier, but they do exist.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, BigEFly said:

And it was a slap not a punch and Rock saw it coming.  If physical altercation was coming, a slap is the most appropriate physical response.  But my wife would argue that the slap and shouting would neither be an appropriate response, at least to me.  Growing up in Texas, she tends to think everybody is armed.

Makes for a polite society.

16 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

So you think Hurts has shown similar flashes of a Peyton Manning or Joe Burrow in their early years to warrant Hurts getting another year to "develop"? 

Based on what? I get maybe not liking Pickett or any of the other QB's coming out of the draftr this year, but what you are selling along the way, smells like it came out of a fertilizer plant

It turns out, it wasn't that shocking that Manning, Burrow, and Manning developed -- because they were drafted #1, #1, and #1

Meanwhile, Hurts was ranked universally as a 3rd round prospect who the Eagles drafted in the 2nd round and (I guess) it logically follows that he'll pick up the finer points of QB play, just like those other guys did.