Just now, Iggles_Phan said:

No, he wasn't.  He was raw coming out of college, and remained raw for 2 years.   He was also a top 10 pick for a reason.  Hurts was skipped over by every NFL team for a reason as well.  

Trubisky was a toolsy prospect too. Bust. Paxton Lynch was a toolsy prospect. Bust. Both Winston/Mariota had the measurables/arms and didn't pan out.

There's no guarantee a QB improves.

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

No, he wasn't.  He was raw coming out of college, and remained raw for 2 years.   He was also a top 10 pick for a reason.  Hurts was skipped over by every NFL team for a reason as well.  

I find the Hurts debate fascinating I really do. It's may be one of my favourite QB debates over the last few years... And let's be honest Philly have had a number!

16 minutes ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

Easier said than done. Buffalo was the #1 ranked defense and got absolutely shredded. So for those who want to rebuild the defense with three first round picks, that sounds like the correct move in theory but that will only get you so far. This is the modern day NFL. The rules allow for explosive, productive offenses and the defense is already at a disadvantage before the game even kicks off. Defense is obviously important and you can't be bottom of the barrel from a skill perspective, but if you can't compete in shootouts, you're not going deep. And what this really comes down to is that if you don't have great to elite quarterback play, you're in trouble for the next ten years with guys like Mahomes, Allen, Herbert, and Burrow entering or in their primes. The good news for the Eagles is that those are all AFC quarterbacks, but I'd expect that to be the trend moving forward as teams prioritize trying to find their franchise quarterbacks. 

I was on board for using the draft capital on the defense, but after watching this weekend's set of games it feels like these elite teams are playing a different sport offensively than the Eagles. And the common factor is elite quarterback play outside of San Francisco. 

Of course.  They chose to play conservative defense down the stretch and it cost them.  

I've been replaying those last 13 seconds in my mind, and that was just a bizarre set of circumstances.  All 3 timeouts (Andy never has all of them at that point in the game!).  

 

I think the Bills never worked on something quite so unique.  BUT, the defense had to be 2 DL (preferably DEs), 2 LBs and 7 DBs... jam all the receivers and play 4 DBs over the top.  No sense in the DL even really rushing that much... just keep Mahomes in the pocket.  If he runs around or holds the ball... that's just a benefit as the clock is the biggest threat to the Chiefs.   And the 5 defenders on the line keep their jams for the full 5 yards... and maybe a bit more.

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Of course.  They chose to play conservative defense down the stretch and it cost them.  

I've been replaying those last 13 seconds in my mind, and that was just a bizarre set of circumstances.  All 3 timeouts (Andy never has all of them at that point in the game!).  

 

I think the Bills never worked on something quite so unique.  BUT, the defense had to be 2 DL (preferably DEs), 2 LBs and 7 DBs... jam all the receivers and play 4 DBs over the top.  No sense in the DL even really rushing that much... just keep Mahomes in the pocket.  If he runs around or holds the ball... that's just a benefit as the clock is the biggest threat to the Chiefs.   And the 5 defenders on the line keep their jams for the full 5 yards... and maybe a bit more.

The decision not to squib and then the defenses called are what lost that game for Buffalo, hands down. 

1 minute ago, Outlaw said:

The decision not to squib and then the defenses called are what lost that game for Buffalo, hands down. 

I blame the team captain who made the wrong call at the coin toss.

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

I'll dare say that yesterday was the best day of non-eagles playoff football I have ever seen.  I remember thinking as the 1st quarter of the KC/Buffalo game was winding down, that it was kind of boring and anti-climactic following the previous games, but wait until the 4th quarter....Even though it wasn't actually boring.  Just compared to the mayhem of the Rams/Bucs game....the start of the late game was kind of a break in a way.    Everyone get some dinner....reload and buckle up.  And Oh MY God....what a finish to an amazing weekend.  I can't imagine how I would have been if the Eagles were in either one of those games.  Part of me is grateful that they aren't...because the stress is too much.  I would have had a heart attack.  

 

 

C’mon SB52 was a heart attack too down to the wire. 

Not a good look when reporters F it up like this.

2 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

I find the Hurts debate fascinating I really do. It's may be one of my favourite QB debates over the last few years... And let's be honest Philly have had a number!

The Vick/Foles ones were legendary. Most of that generation are no longer active posters though unfortunately but it was epic. 

The Wentz/Foles ones weren’t that interesting and the main ringleader got banned pretty quickly too.

This Hurts one is different because it really isn’t a QB competition - it’s really a question of ascertaining a player’s ceiling which is an impossible argument to win on either side.

9 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

I must be missing something, please explain, I too am curious as to why this guy gets the positive push despite obviously lacking the ability? 

50 minutes ago, Thing3 said:

Or with a little patience we could be much more than competitive for years to come.

Explain if you don't mind.

Though the least likely scenario…can you imagine a Niners-Bengals SB rematch? Lmao

1 minute ago, D-Shiznit said:

Not a good look when reporters F it up like this.

It’s why I have grown sympathetic to those who no longer trust the media. It’s a quest for attention instead of accuracy.

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Obviously...

 

I was so drunk during that game...and I was tearing up with 5 mins left because of my folks.  I don't remember feeling stressed. For whatever odd reason.  

Dude, I bawled like a kid who loses WiFi. I still can tear up watching highlights. 

47 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Defense was important to Tampa for winning the SB last year.  It was important to SF Sat night.  Defense is still a big issue.  Not everyone can have a QB like Mahomes...If we have a good QB and a crap Gannon soft ass defense we can compete.....for what?  A playoff spot?  Like I said last night.  Defense can get you there.  A great QB will keep you there.  You focus on acquiring both.  

I would say the neither Buffalo not K.C.'s defense did squat.

1 minute ago, Thrive said:

The Vick/Foles ones were legendary. Most of that generation are no longer active posters though unfortunately but it was epic. 

The Wentz/Foles ones weren’t that interesting and the main ringleader got banned pretty quickly too.

This Hurts one is different because it really isn’t a QB competition - it’s really a question of ascertaining a player’s ceiling which is an impossible argument to win on either side.

So we are now debating which QB debate was the best debate?

41 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

 

 

 

 

Realistically in this QB thirsty league, where do we think Strong goes in the draft?  I'd argue he goes in the 1st. BUt admittingly, I am not that up on stuff and it's early (pre combine)

 

16-30 range

12 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

Yes, but "why” is the question…

Nope. Not touching that. Un-uh, nope not a chance.

37 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

It was.  Bills stop the Chiefs on any of the last 3 drives... they win.  

 

I don't disagree on the need for a QB.  But defense is still valuable.  It was the defense on the field multiple times for the Bills and they let their team down.

And they didn't and their defense is supposed to be decent, no?

2 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

So we are now debating which QB debate was the best debate?

Touché 

Just now, greend said:

And they didn't and their defense is supposed to be decent, no?

More than decent, they were the #1 overall Defense in the entire NFL.

2 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

Though the least likely scenario…can you imagine a Niners-Bengals SB rematch? Lmao

They mentioned last night that SB XVI was the highest rated sporting event in TV history.

6 minutes ago, RLC said:

Trubisky was a toolsy prospect too. Bust. Paxton Lynch was a toolsy prospect. Bust. Both Winston/Mariota had the measurables/arms and didn't pan out.

There's no guarantee a QB improves.

Of course not.  But it takes a little longer with a QB with the tools to be labeled 'bust'.  

Trubisky showed some promise in 2018, then really regressed after that. 

Paxton Lynch... was he really 'toolsy'?  He always seemed like a desperation move to me.  And never showed anything in the NFL. 

Winston's problem has always been between his ears.  Mariota... he suffered from the some of the same issues as Hurts... always relied on this legs to get him out of trouble, but had a much stronger arm.  Hurts... even if he gets his mental game and vision fixed... will still have a pea-shooter.

1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Ok...against two legendary QB performances....yeah, that would happen.  

 

Still doesn't say anything about the lack of importance on the defensive side.  What's your point really?

Quarterback trumps defense. 

21 hours ago, austinfan said:

Say, did anyone score 20 points yesterday?

Guess defense and special teams still matter.

The #1 and #5 scoring defense both lost yesterday.  Both of those teams also have elite QB's.  Imagine how bad the losses would have been with a Jalen Hurts type QB under center.  An elite defense with a game manager is not a recipe for continued success, the NFL is an offensive league, and you need a high powered offense with an elite QB to win.  

In the last two weekends, the #1, #2, #5, #6 and  #7 scoring defenses have been eliminated.  

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Of course not.  But it takes a little longer with a QB with the tools to be labeled 'bust'.  

You just talked yourself into Daniel Jones. 
Same logic would have applied to Bortles, Locker, Freeman, etc.

I think we're undercutting how unique of a situation Josh Allen is. His ascent is rare!