Jump to content
Connecticut Eagle

EMB Blog: 2022 OTAs thru Pre-Season

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

His name is pangbun. I don’t think I want to know what comes out of the mouth of someone named pangbun

ok, captain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

His name is pangbun. I don’t think I want to know what comes out of the mouth of someone named pangbun

Everybody have fun tonight.  Everybody pangbun tonight.   

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The blog could use a clone that just posts memes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

The blog could use a clone that just posts memes.

When one comes along, we’ll know who it is.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Alphagrand said:

My philosophy probably leans towards what the Eagles and many other teams are doing now.  It’s not 1990 anymore; these players treat football as a 12 month per year occupation and most come to training camp in peak physical condition.  Those that don’t usually aren’t long for full time employment.

I view the preseason as an opportunity for the 2nd/3rd string players to show something against peer competition, but under a larger microscope to earn a position on the 53-man roster.  IMO the starters should play one quarter in PS Game 1, little more than one quarter in PS Game 2, then the bottom half of the roster show what they’ve got in order for the team to make roster decisions.

Pretty much everyone here knows who the Eagles starting 11 will be, on both sides of the ball.  Whatever method works best for minimizing preseason injuries to those players is the side I typically land on.

The scrimmages are more important to Sirianni than the games, b/c he can script the scrimmages with the other coach and see players have multiple reps in situations, whereas in a game he has limited control, especially if they're only playing a quarter or a half.

I think the exhibitions have more value for the backups only b/c they get a taste of game conditions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Alphagrand said:

You disrespectful SOBs.  Hurtsy had 5

I wouldn't mind guessing what his 2022 completion percentage will be.  My prediction is 62.8%

yes, but he didn't get to play the Eagle defense. 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, olsilverhair said:

do you ever post sentences or just memes, are we clear pang

 

4163FA82-8C08-48C7-9526-FE419D0DD914.gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, austinfan said:

The scrimmages are more important to Sirianni than the games, b/c he can script the scrimmages with the other coach and see players have multiple reps in situations, whereas in a game he has limited control, especially if they're only playing a quarter or a half.

I think the exhibitions have more value for the backups only b/c they get a taste of game conditions.

Sure but having that limited control in games is also a skill that needs to be developed. You can’t setup scenarios when the bullets are live, strange things happen in games, there’s a pressure element that just isn’t replicable in practice or scrimmage. How a coach and staff reacts to those situations has importance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, justrelax said:

Perhaps my notion that what the Eagles have chosen to do is valid - have vets and rookies report at the same time - is less than scintillating. At the same time, however, the notion that a coach would deliberately sabotage his team by giving them less practices, reps, etc. is even worse. More is not always more. I see tired, well, that's the way it's always done arguments. Not a one of us has our livelihood at risk by this decision, yet I see a lot of quick-trigger reactions.

Pre-season is too long; we've all agreed on that forever. Given that, why burden the squad with endless reps AND meaningless games?  Lest we forget, we have not one but two practices with other squads. Perhaps, just maybe, this staff sees those things as being useful, maybe even more useful than a week of rookies only in July heat. If they thought the OTAs they have eschewed had utility, why would they give them up? I have seen no answers to this simple question.

The generic answer is that more is better than less. I say not so.

I would be appreciative if contrary opinions were at least civil in their expression. I have a few people on ignore but is not for their wisdom or lack thereof, but for the fact that they are rude. I can't devour them as Hannibal Lecter might, those he referred to as "free-range rude." 

I can be stupid, as is obvious, but I strive not to be rude. There is no excuse for that.

Ever.

The front office has certainly fallen prey to hubris before, and this may be another example where they think they know better.

I was ok with the experiment last year because sometimes you do need to try different approaches. But as leanmean pointed out our first month last year was a sloppy, penalty filled mess. It makes me far more apprehensive this off-season that we seem to be repeating the approach.

Now, there’s an argument that it was a new system, a new coach, etc and that may have played into the sloppiness; but then that’s all the more reason they should have had more reps! A perfectly circular argument!

If we start out sloppy and poor again this season, I think that’s enough evidence to support ditching this off-season strategy. If we come out looking sharp and crisp, then I could see it becoming the new norm. I lean towards us coming out sloppy, but hope to be pleasantly surprised

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have all preseason to get it right. Starters need their reps together. If not, then we’ll start sloppy.

Question I have is will they come in in game shape. Dunno. Some of these old fat guys aren’t really fighting for their jobs. 

Don’t work em too hard in OTA’s. They might not wanna show up.

What’s next? 3/4 speed in 1/4 of the playing time in the preseason?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, justrelax said:

Perhaps my notion that what the Eagles have chosen to do is valid - have vets and rookies report at the same time - is less than scintillating. At the same time, however, the notion that a coach would deliberately sabotage his team by giving them less practices, reps, etc. is even worse. More is not always more. I see tired, well, that's the way it's always done arguments. Not a one of us has our livelihood at risk by this decision, yet I see a lot of quick-trigger reactions.

Pre-season is too long; we've all agreed on that forever. Given that, why burden the squad with endless reps AND meaningless games?  Lest we forget, we have not one but two practices with other squads. Perhaps, just maybe, this staff sees those things as being useful, maybe even more useful than a week of rookies only in July heat. If they thought the OTAs they have eschewed had utility, why would they give them up? I have seen no answers to this simple question.

The generic answer is that more is better than less. I say not so.

I would be appreciative if contrary opinions were at least civil in their expression. I have a few people on ignore but is not for their wisdom or lack thereof, but for the fact that they are rude. I can't devour them as Hannibal Lecter might, those he referred to as "free-range rude." 

I can be stupid, as is obvious, but I strive not to be rude. There is no excuse for that.

Ever.

Obviously, Sirianni and the front office think this is the right course of action.  That doesn't mean that it is.  They have been wrong before, as have we all.  To insinuate that just because they think this is the right course of action, it must be is erroneous.  They are capable of being wrong.  

The length of the preseason, which has already been shortened with the new CBA, is completely separate from the question of whether or not the rookies and/or UDFAs would benefit from a little more attention from the coaches is the question on the table.  I have yet to see a single support that says that a young player wouldn't benefit from being in a more intimate setting with the coaches.  Are they actually at higher risk to injury working on techniques and fundamentals?  I don't think so.  And if they are, then they would be at risk working out on their own, if not more so.  At least at the facility there would be medical people on site in case an injury does occur.  

Japanese proverb:  "Better than 1000 days of diligent study, is one day with a good teacher."   

Would Jurgens benefit more from working out alone, or working out with Stoutland?  Is that even a question?   

Would it be better for Davis to get in to the facility and work on his nutrition and making the proper eating habits more ingrained versus trying to do it on his own?  

Would it be better for Nakobe Dean to actually sit in the same room and study film with the LBs coaches versus trying to do it over Zoom?  (Anyone who suggests that Zoom would be just as good hasn't actually used Zoom to try to instruct or learn.) 

 

Using the joint practices in place of PS games, I can see the argument.  Just passing on the few opportunities to have the players in contact with the coaches makes no sense to me.  I've yet to see any argument to actually support that position other than, "we need to try something new".   New was tried last year, and it didn't work well... with a new coach, new system, new QB... this year we have new players in very important positions.  Why limit yourself beyond the limitations already imposed by the CBA?   No one said that they should be in full contact during these days, but should be in full learning mode.  Nor did anyone say that it has to be done in the 'July heat'.  Do it early in the morning - not that hot then.  Do it later in the evening - not that hot then either.  Do it in the meeting rooms at the NovaCare Complex or do it in the indoor practice facility, as there wouldn't be a space issue.   Or, are we suggesting that these superior athletes are less capable of dealing with elements than the average roofer, construction worker, landscaper?  There are plenty of smart ways to do it, even on the hottest of days.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TorontoEagle said:

The front office has certainly fallen prey to hubris before, and this may be another example where they think they know better.

I was ok with the experiment last year because sometimes you do need to try different approaches. But as leanmean pointed out our first month last year was a sloppy, penalty filled mess. It makes me far more apprehensive this off-season that we seem to be repeating the approach.

Now, there’s an argument that it was a new system, a new coach, etc and that may have played into the sloppiness; but then that’s all the more reason they should have had more reps! A perfectly circular argument!

If we start out sloppy and poor again this season, I think that’s enough evidence to support ditching this off-season strategy. If we come out looking sharp and crisp, then I could see it becoming the new norm. I lean towards us coming out sloppy, but hope to be pleasantly surprised

The Rams also do what the Eagles are doing. This process works. It's more of a question of talent and scheme. Also, we blew out the Falcons in the opener last year.

Rams' starts.
2021: 3-0
2020: 4-1
2019: 3-0

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RLC said:

The Rams also do what the Eagles are doing. This process works. It's more of a question of talent and scheme. Also, we blew out the Falcons in the opener last year.

Rams' starts.
2021: 3-0
2020: 4-1
2019: 3-0

That's also a very veteran team, that basically has had no draft picks to worry about.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

That's also a very veteran team, that basically has had no draft picks to worry about.

They had a new QB last year + have more back of the roster turnover than most teams (given the amount of round 4 to 7 picks they use).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's game is very different.

Players used to get in shape in TC, today, if you show up out of shape, you're behind the 8-ball, and many have professional trainers or go to pro workout groups.

With I-pads, edited film, etc., players have no excuse not to do their homework before camp, studying the playbook, not just Xs and Os on a page, but film of what they should be doing.

You don't think Stoutland doesn't have an intern put together cutouts for players, for example?

Now we're only talking about missing a couple days of hands on instruction, and it may well be they feel there's diminishing returns so they would rather have fewer days of highly structured practice, with the kids watching veterans go through their paces, then "imitating" them.

Eagles did have less injuries and finished strong, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Today's game is very different.

Players used to get in shape in TC, today, if you show up out of shape, you're behind the 8-ball, and many have professional trainers or go to pro workout groups.

With I-pads, edited film, etc., players have no excuse not to do their homework before camp, studying the playbook, not just Xs and Os on a page, but film of what they should be doing.

You don't think Stoutland doesn't have an intern put together cutouts for players, for example?

Now we're only talking about missing a couple days of hands on instruction, and it may well be they feel there's diminishing returns so they would rather have fewer days of highly structured practice, with the kids watching veterans go through their paces, then "imitating" them.

Eagles did have less injuries and finished strong, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I think we’re talking past each other here. If it were just missing the OTAs and doing a "normal” preseason it wouldn’t be a big deal. My problem is with what seems like a general "passiveness” to the entire preseason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” Is literally the advice the Eagles didn’t follow 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RLC said:

The Rams also do what the Eagles are doing. This process works. It's more of a question of talent and scheme. Also, we blew out the Falcons in the opener last year.

Rams' starts.
2021: 3-0
2020: 4-1
2019: 3-0

And we were on a record pace for most penalties. Mostly procedural penalties.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RLC said:

They had a new QB last year + have more back of the roster turnover than most teams (given the amount of round 4 to 7 picks they use).

Veteran QB versus 'basically a rookie'.  Their OL was anchored by a LT with 20+ years of NFL experience.  Eagles' LT has been playing American football for about 4 years total.  Eagles' top WR was a rookie.  Rams' top WR was in year 5.   Rookie HC (who was also a rookie play caller, as Reich called the plays in Indy) versus a HC who had already taken his team to the Super Bowl. 

Should I keep going or are you ready to admit that using the Rams is a false equivalence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Veteran QB versus 'basically a rookie'.  Their OL was anchored by a LT with 20+ years of NFL experience.  Eagles' LT has been playing American football for about 4 years total.  Eagles' top WR was a rookie.  Rams' top WR was in year 5.   Rookie HC (who was also a rookie play caller, as Reich called the plays in Indy) versus a HC who had already taken his team to the Super Bowl. 

Should I keep going or are you ready to admit that using the Rams is a false equivalence?

Not only a veteran QB, but an actual QB.  Not what we have.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are the Rams even being mentioned when their off-season schedule is 

  • Rookie Minicamp: May 13-15
  • OTAs: May 23-24, May 26, May 31-June 2
  • Mandatory Minicamp: June 7-9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Obviously, Sirianni and the front office think this is the right course of action.  That doesn't mean that it is.  They have been wrong before, as have we all.  To insinuate that just because they think this is the right course of action, it must be is erroneous.  They are capable of being wrong.  

The length of the preseason, which has already been shortened with the new CBA, is completely separate from the question of whether or not the rookies and/or UDFAs would benefit from a little more attention from the coaches is the question on the table.  I have yet to see a single support that says that a young player wouldn't benefit from being in a more intimate setting with the coaches.  Are they actually at higher risk to injury working on techniques and fundamentals?  I don't think so.  And if they are, then they would be at risk working out on their own, if not more so.  At least at the facility there would be medical people on site in case an injury does occur.  

Japanese proverb:  "Better than 1000 days of diligent study, is one day with a good teacher."   

Would Jurgens benefit more from working out alone, or working out with Stoutland?  Is that even a question?   

Would it be better for Davis to get in to the facility and work on his nutrition and making the proper eating habits more ingrained versus trying to do it on his own?  

Would it be better for Nakobe Dean to actually sit in the same room and study film with the LBs coaches versus trying to do it over Zoom?  (Anyone who suggests that Zoom would be just as good hasn't actually used Zoom to try to instruct or learn.) 

 

Using the joint practices in place of PS games, I can see the argument.  Just passing on the few opportunities to have the players in contact with the coaches makes no sense to me.  I've yet to see any argument to actually support that position other than, "we need to try something new".   New was tried last year, and it didn't work well... with a new coach, new system, new QB... this year we have new players in very important positions.  Why limit yourself beyond the limitations already imposed by the CBA?   No one said that they should be in full contact during these days, but should be in full learning mode.  Nor did anyone say that it has to be done in the 'July heat'.  Do it early in the morning - not that hot then.  Do it later in the evening - not that hot then either.  Do it in the meeting rooms at the NovaCare Complex or do it in the indoor practice facility, as there wouldn't be a space issue.   Or, are we suggesting that these superior athletes are less capable of dealing with elements than the average roofer, construction worker, landscaper?  There are plenty of smart ways to do it, even on the hottest of days.

Right or wrong, if they think this is the right course of action it would be irresponsible of them not to do it.

By contrast, college football practices run roughly 4-6 weeks before the opener, with no pre-season. These guys are less skilled than the pros. Alabama's first practice is scheduled for August 5 and their opener is August 27. The Eagles will start - what? July 26 - and their opener is September 11, more than a week earlier and ending two weeks later than Alabama's.

The players have plenty to do. They're sent off with playbooks, iPads, and almost all of them work with trainers. The coaches give them regimens to practice and lifting schedules. As I argued a week or two ago, OL OTAs without contact are close to worthless. Same for the DL and LBs. Those OTAs recently completed are basically passing camps, at least as regards what's done on the field. Meetings are installs of terminology and some film work. The coaches can talk until they're blue in the face but without contact there's no muscle memory. You can talk about hand placement forever but if the player can't actually do it, it's wasted breath.

Finally, for the rookies, the past several months have been a whirlwind. Bowl games, combine, pro days, hiring agents, going on interview after interview, draft day, OTAs, NFL orientations and, oh yes, some of them even find time to graduate. Better to get their lives together and take a breath before going to camp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, justrelax said:

Right or wrong, if they think this is the right course of action it would be irresponsible of them not to do it.

By contrast, college football practices run roughly 4-6 weeks before the opener, with no pre-season. These guys are less skilled than the pros. Alabama's first practice is scheduled for August 5 and their opener is August 27. The Eagles will start - what? July 26 - and their opener is September 11, more than a week earlier and ending two weeks later than Alabama's.

The players have plenty to do. They're sent off with playbooks, iPads, and almost all of them work with trainers. The coaches give them regimens to practice and lifting schedules. As I argued a week or two ago, OL OTAs without contact are close to worthless. Same for the DL and LBs. Those OTAs recently completed are basically passing camps, at least as regards what's done on the field. Meetings are installs of terminology and some film work. The coaches can talk until they're blue in the face but without contact there's no muscle memory. You can talk about hand placement forever but if the player can't actually do it, it's wasted breath.

Finally, for the rookies, the past several months have been a whirlwind. Bowl games, combine, pro days, hiring agents, going on interview after interview, draft day, OTAs, NFL orientations and, oh yes, some of them even find time to graduate. Better to get their lives together and take a breath before going to camp.

Sure thing.  But that doesn't mean that they are above criticism for following that path.

College football also generally starts with the big teams playing the Middle Arkansas State level teams to get their work in.  College football is also far less complicated than pro football, and most of the time, it isn't the better coached team that wins, but the team with the better talent.  There's a much wider talent gap in the NCAA than the NFL.

I feel bad for these guys, really... it must be so hard for them.  It's almost like it is a full time job once they go pro.  Plenty of college grads have similar pressures right after graduation, finding a new home, finding a new job and don't have the benefit of a signing bonus to help them finance these things.  The NFL is now their chosen vocation.  It is full time.

We just aren't going to see eye to eye on this.   The NFL has made the opportunities for the teams to work with players extremely limited and the Eagles are limiting themselves beyond that (and I'll add the word 'needlessly' here).   They don't have to limit themselves as much as they are, yet they are.  That's their choice.  And it is their prerogative to do so.  And it is the prerogative of fans to criticize that decision.  Just like a coach can make a foolish play call at the goal line, go for it on 4th down in an unconventional moment, etc.  And while that coach, obviously, thought that was the best decision for the team at that time, the fans can disagree with it, both as it happens and after the outcome is known.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, pangbun said:

 

4163FA82-8C08-48C7-9526-FE419D0DD914.gif

Do it one more time, see what happens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...