17 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

Did you not read the qualifier, "when weighed against expenditures"?

Let's try this another way. How many teams do not regret "bad" moves? 

If you get the qb, he was worth any price you paid.

 

 

Howie, please get this guy.

2 hours ago, Ace Nova said:

Honest question, would you support the Eagles brining back Wentz if Indy made a reasonable offer? 

I guess he'd be a good backup to hurts...

6 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

This theory that you can only build the team first and then magically a QB  from the heavens and football gods is going to be delivered into Eagles laps like KC.  You can as easily wind up being the Broncos now or the Bears a couple years ago who had a stacked defense and then took trubisky but never capitalized on that roster.

There’s two scenarios that can play out. One does fall into your lap or you continue to keep searching and not finding with a built up roster wasting that roster. That’s why I said if there’s a quarterback that you truly love and you covet and available then go get it and dicking around it and just hope there’s one there down there road. Hope it’s not a plan

The Bears had a stacked defense but no one to surround a young QB. Drafting a young QB without a solid OL and some skill players is usually an exercise in futility. When Brady took over from Bledsoe, they had a solid OL and running game, and WRs suited to the short passing game that limited his exposure.  When Mahomes took over in KC, he took over a well functioniong offense under Smith. Brees in NO.  And so on.

@austinfan, it's not 2000 anymore. You can't just win with good OL and competent QB play. You need a top 10 passing game.

Ok, that was funny. 

35 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

If you get the qb, he was worth any price you paid.

And if you end up with Goff? Or Leaf? Or . .

1 minute ago, austinfan said:

And if you end up with Goff? Or Leaf? Or . .

You have to take that chance.  You are not gonna win a title with Jalen Hurts.  

1 hour ago, austinfan said:

No, it's not. When you give up a huge amount of assets for a QB, it's a bad move if it doesn't work out, because that's the kind of move you should only make with a very high probability of success.  It's one thing to take a 50/50 gamble with a late first rd pick, quite another with a package of 3 or 4 top assets.

And its a great move when it works out.  

11 minutes ago, austinfan said:

And if you end up with Goff? Or Leaf? Or . .

Then you are in the same position you are in with Hurts... in need of a quarterback.  

19 minutes ago, austinfan said:

And if you end up with Goff? Or Leaf? Or . .

Same thing if you build your roster up and no QB becomes available, can’t get into position to acquire that QB you want in the draft or you can’t acquire the one you want and have to settle on one that’s not good enough. Or if you draft or trade for one after you build your roster and they are a bust. You still aren’t winning crap.

The biggest issue with your plan is you just automatically assume that there is going to be a quarterback that’s good enough that’s available when the eagles need it after the roster is built up. That’s not a given.   You assuming itll just happen and just hoping one does isn’t a plan. Hoping and assuming one will just magically become available is great until that goes the opposite way 

10 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

And its a great move when it works out.  

Shhhhut the front door. You can get a QB that actually works out when giving up assets? No way

2 hours ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I mean you’re arguing with the guy who still doesn’t believe Patrick Mahomes is proven. Even though if he wins this weekend he will be playing in his fourth consecutive AFC title game in 4 years as a starter. and if he wins that game his third consecutive Super Bowl. and this was considered a down year for him and he is top five or 10 in almost every statistical category.

The only reason why keeps coming up with his conclusions is because he doesn’t wanna go out and get another quarterback because he believes there’s only one way to build your roster which is you build it all up and then get a quarterback. Meanwhile the Cincinnati Bengals are not regretting drafting Joe Burrow and could potentially be playing in the AFC title game in a week from now after the bengals were an awful 2 win team when he was drafted. I’m sure the Los Angeles Chargers are not regretting taking Justin Herbert. There’s multiple ways to skin a cat. He just doesn’t want to believe it because it’s not what he wants to do.

the eagles can go either way. I don’t have a problem if they go either direction about it. However there is more than just one way you can build the roster you want and get to where you want to go.

I think one of the things you have to consider is matching the windows. Let’s say we trade for Wilson. What do you figure - he has 3 good years left?

if that’s true, with the assets you have to give to get him, his window is going to close before you build a team around him that is capable of winning it all. Maybe you get lucky with one year overlap. Maybe.
 

if you go big to get a young QB you have far greater luxury of a timeline to build the rest of the team. 

wilson is who you trade for when he is the last piece of the puzzle. Not one of the first. 

10 minutes ago, purplefiggy said:

I think one of the things you have to consider is matching the windows. Let’s say we trade for Wilson. What do you figure - he has 3 good years left?

if that’s true, with the assets you have to give to get him, his window is going to close before you build a team around him that is capable of winning it all. Maybe you get lucky with one year overlap. Maybe.
 

if you go big to get a young QB you have far greater luxury of a timeline to build the rest of the team. 

wilson is who you trade for when he is the last piece of the puzzle. Not one of the first. 

Voice of reason.

15 minutes ago, purplefiggy said:

I think one of the things you have to consider is matching the windows. Let’s say we trade for Wilson. What do you figure - he has 3 good years left?

if that’s true, with the assets you have to give to get him, his window is going to close before you build a team around him that is capable of winning it all. Maybe you get lucky with one year overlap. Maybe.
 

if you go big to get a young QB you have far greater luxury of a timeline to build the rest of the team. 

wilson is who you trade for when he is the last piece of the puzzle. Not one of the first. 

I am not suggesting going after Russell Wilson. I can see the Eagles doing it because it’s the Eagles and they covet Russell Wilson because they missed on him long ago in the draft. I would prefer going with a younger quarterback. In the past when talking about Russell Wilson I pointed out how the Eagles might view it if they go after them. And the justification youd like get with him. That doesn’t mean that’s the guy I would ultimately target

I am of the opinion you only go after a quarterback that you truly believe to be the future of your organization for a good period of time and you truly love. If you don’t love him or you don’t think they could be a long term answer then don’t do it. However this whole if they believe in this quarterback and love that QB they still shouldn’t do it because the roster is not ready it’s a bunch of BS. If you love a quarterback, he’s available and you think he’s the future go get him. 

3 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I am not suggesting going after Russell Wilson. I can see the Eagles doing it because it’s the Eagles and they covet Russell Wilson because they missed on him long ago in the draft. I would prefer going with a younger quarterback. 

I am of the opinion you only go after a quarterback that you truly believe to be the future of your organization for a good period of time and you truly love. If you don’t love him or you don’t think they could be a long term answer then don’t do it. However this whole if they believe in this quarterback and love that QB they still shouldn’t do it because the roster is not ready it’s a bunch of BS. If you love a quarterback, he’s available and you think he’s the future go get him. 

Your qualifier of "if you think he’s the future” is a big factor for me too. I either want a young QB or I am willing to wait - even if that means watching Hurts crap the bed for another season. 

5 minutes ago, purplefiggy said:

Your qualifier of "if you think he’s the future” is a big factor for me too. I either want a young QB or I am willing to wait - even if that means watching Hurts crap the bed for another season. 

I’ve said this in the past whatever decision they choose to go in is what it is. Frankly i think they swing and miss on one of these veterans  and it’s hurts at QB next year. 

 The thing that irritates me is the theory because our roster isn’t good enough we shouldn’t go get a quarterback if there’s a quarterback available that the Eagles truly truly love and believe is the future of their organization. they should go get that QB if that’s the case regardless of what the roster looks like. You don’t pass up on quarterbacks like that Because your roster is not ready and you just hope one just like that comes along in a couple years cause there might not be. 

37 minutes ago, Peppersmacks said:

Then you are in the same position you are in with Hurts... in need of a quarterback.  

But with a lot less assets.

51 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Ok, that was funny. 

This would be tremendous.

1 minute ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I’ve said this in the past whatever decision they choose to go in is what it is. Frankly i think they swing and miss on one of these veterans  and it’s hurts at QB next year. 

 The thing that irritates me is the theory because our roster isn’t good enough we shouldn’t go get a quarterback if there’s a quarterback available that the Eagles truly truly love and believe is the future of their organization. they should go get that QB if that’s the case regardless of what the roster looks like. You don’t pass up on quarterbacks like that Because your roster is not ready and you just hope one just like that comes along in a couple years

That's a different matter. That's what they did with Wentz. Almost paid off, and Howie also reduced the cost by clever moves like dumping Kelly's overpriced players.

That's far different that reaching for mediocre prospects in a bad QB draft or trading for a "name" veteran who isn't good enough to be a difference maker for this team.

38 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Same thing if you build your roster up and no QB becomes available, can’t get into position to acquire that QB you want in the draft or you can’t acquire the one you want and have to settle on one that’s not good enough. Or if you draft or trade for one after you build your roster and they are a bust. You still aren’t winning crap.

The biggest issue with your plan is you just automatically assume that there is going to be a quarterback that’s good enough that’s available when the eagles need it after the roster is built up. That’s not a given.   You assuming itll just happen and just hoping one does isn’t a plan. Hoping and assuming one will just magically become available is great until that goes the opposite way 

What I assume is the better the team you build, the larger the number of potential QBs who can win a SB with that team.

The corpse of Peyton won with Denver, 44 year old Brady with TB, and so on. Foles with the Eagles!

If you have a really good team, you don't need a great QB, just a good one. If you have merely a good team, then you ma need a great QB - and they're really hard to obtain.

55 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Ok, that was funny. 

Would be a nice swap. Broncos take Gannon and we will take Vic Fangio. Im sold.

Just now, DeathByEagle said:

Would be a nice swap. Broncos take Gannon and we will take Vic Fangio. Im sold.

Not me.