3 hours ago, Bacarty2 said:

This is one of those old wives tales. Whens the last time something bad happened in Miami?

Last thing I can remember is the giants smoking weed on a boat on their bye week. Which, theres boats every where and weeds legal now. 

 

Is weed legal in the NFL now? Just because it's legal in a state doesn't mean it's acceptable to the league.

16 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I am leaning towards Jack Anderson making the team.  I could actually see Anderson and Driscoll being the active OL during games, with Dillard, Jurgens and Opeta (if not on the PS) relegated to the inactive. That doesn’t mean that Anderson is better than Jurgens or even Opeta, although as to the latter, it looks pretty close. It doesn’t mean that Driscoll is better than Dillard or even Opeta although as to the latter, I think he is. Nope, I think it goes down to versatility.  Sure, Seumalo and Dickerson can play C, but you don’t want to move OL around mid game.  Jurgens, while looking great at C, hasn’t got any snaps at G.  Anderson has seen snaps at every IOL position.  Opeta is strictly a G.  Driscoll has seen snaps at G and both OT positions. Heaven forbid either LT or C go down.  Who plays reserve during a game doesn’t have to be the best replacement, just a player who can fill in for the remainder of a game.  If a full game absence, Dillard or Jurgens are the obvious choices.  But as to reserve players, Anderson and Driscoll seem the better option.  That way they can go seven active OL instead of 8. @justrelax, is that out on a limb too far?

Disagree.  Yes, Anderson can play center.  But you lose half of your run scheme without Kelce or Jurgens. 

I also wouldn't roll the dice with only dressing seven.  I'd go with Jurgens, Dillard, and Driscoll.

7 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

That would almost guarantee that Jurgens is inactive then, wouldn’t it?  Or do they risk Dillard at RT if Driscoll is needed at a G spot?  Do they risk Jurgens, untested, at a G spot?

Obviously depends on injuries but I'd think Eagles are always going to dress 8 linemen if they can to take advantage of the 48th player rule. 5 starters with Dillard, Jurgens, Driscoll as your backups. It's not ideal having Jurgens and Dillard not having as much versatility as an Anderson but I think they could get by in a game. They also have some options reshuffling the line like moving Seumalo back to LG, Mailata to RT etc if they need to in a pinch. 

21 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I am leaning towards Jack Anderson making the team.  I could actually see Anderson and Driscoll being the active OL during games, with Dillard, Jurgens and Opeta (if not on the PS) relegated to the inactive. That doesn’t mean that Anderson is better than Jurgens or even Opeta, although as to the latter, it looks pretty close. It doesn’t mean that Driscoll is better than Dillard or even Opeta although as to the latter, I think he is. Nope, I think it goes down to versatility.  Sure, Seumalo and Dickerson can play C, but you don’t want to move OL around mid game.  Jurgens, while looking great at C, hasn’t got any snaps at G.  Anderson has seen snaps at every IOL position.  Opeta is strictly a G.  Driscoll has seen snaps at G and both OT positions. Heaven forbid either LT or C go down.  Who plays reserve during a game doesn’t have to be the best replacement, just a player who can fill in for the remainder of a game.  If a full game absence, Dillard or Jurgens are the obvious choices.  But as to reserve players, Anderson and Driscoll seem the better option.  That way they can go seven active OL instead of 8. @justrelax, is that out on a limb too far?

If a team dresses seven offensive linemen, they can activate an eighth for free. It’s something like "You can have 7 OL active with 46 total, or 8 active with 47 total”. I forget the exact numbers. So I think every team will dress eight for every game. The Eagles will dress three backups every game. To me, Dillard, Driscoll, and Jurgens makes the most sense. The first two can play tackle, the latter two can play guard, and the final one can play center. Dickerson’s ability to play center helps too. 

11 minutes ago, eglz1 said:

Is weed legal in the NFL now? Just because it's legal in a state doesn't mean it's acceptable to the league.

It's not fully legal, but the testing/punishments have been scaled back dramatically. No one will get suspended for it anymore.

2 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

If a team dresses seven offensive linemen, they can activate an eighth for free. It’s something like "You can have 7 OL active with 46 total, or 8 active with 47 total”. I forget the exact numbers. So I think every team will dress eight for every game. The Eagles will dress three backups every game. To me, Dillard, Driscoll, and Jurgens makes the most sense. The first two can play tackle, the latter two can play guard, and the final one can play center. Dickerson’s ability to play center helps too. 

Agree. Need a backup OT, iOL, C. Driscoll can play both RG and RT. Vaitai was valuable, because he could play 4 of the 5 spots.

As for who doesn't dress, it's going to be QB3, RB4 (unless he returns kicks/puts), WR 6, OL9-10, DL9-10. Safeties and LBs usually dress because they're core ST players.

26 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Interesting that teams are moving players to the Reserve/PUP for the 80 man cutdown.  Frankly, given when their injuries occurred, that makes sense for both Toth and Jackson.  

Indications seem to be Jackson is close (spotted working off to the side with trainers a few times as well as observing practices). We'll find out today how close he is. Probably best at this point in TC to just take it slow with him. He still needs to develop and wouldn't help much during the first 4 weeks anyway. 

1 hour ago, Alphagrand said:

Howie threw money at restructuring Jeffery when it was clearly wrong to do so.  

Howie brought Desean Jackson back to steal money and live in the infirmary

Howie picked up an extra year of Agholor when it was obvious he stunk

Howie brought Jalen Mills back to play safety when it was obvious he stunk.

 

Very few people have the blind unwavering confidence in Howie's decisions that you have.  Can't make this type of mistake at QB (again). 

You forgot the entire Peters situation when he was pretty much done but Howie couldn't say no

30 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Makes sense.  He was just a Gainwell/Scott fill in when they weren’t practicing. Kid has some scoot so they may keep his number.  Not sure Huntley looked any better.  

I would have released Huntley.  My opinion is that he has used up all his nine lives as an Eagle.

Of course it is possible that Huntley goes after the Drake clears waivers and the Eagles sign him for a one week tryout.  They don't want to put in a waiver claim because they would inherit his contract if they do.  Much cheaper to wait until he clears.

14 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

You forgot the entire Peters situation when he was pretty much done but Howie couldn't say no

2 hours ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Two very rare occurrences that were not drafted in the top half of the 1st round.  I stand by my statement, bad idea for us then and now.  

Of course you do.

I would assume that Drake has enough years in the league that he wouldn’t be subjected to waivers. 

 

14 hours ago, Cliftoma said:

Buffalo is stacked at RB.  Maybe Duke Johnson or their undrafted fa rookie Blackshear shake free.  

Duke is another pass catching guy. We already have KG, seems repetitive. 

17 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

You forgot the entire Peters situation when he was pretty much done but Howie couldn't say no

There also really wasn’t a suitable replacement for awhile 

7 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

I would assume that Drake has enough years in the league that he wouldn’t be subjected to waivers. 

 

Yup. Why they floated out the plan to release him but didn't actually do it, a hail mary attempt at getting someone to trade for him so they can get out of his contract. 

30 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

If a team dresses seven offensive linemen, they can activate an eighth for free. It’s something like "You can have 7 OL active with 46 total, or 8 active with 47 total”. I forget the exact numbers. So I think every team will dress eight for every game. The Eagles will dress three backups every game. To me, Dillard, Driscoll, and Jurgens makes the most sense. The first two can play tackle, the latter two can play guard, and the final one can play center. Dickerson’s ability to play center helps too. 

Is the free OL still available?  Thought that was a Covid rule so I went to look at the CBA. You are correct, as usual.  CBA states:

Active List: Beginning with the 2020 regular season, the Active List limit shall be increased from forty-six players per Club to forty-eight players per Club; provided, however, that such a Club’s Active List includes a minimum of eight players whose primary playing position is Center, Guard or Tackle (collectively, "Offensive Lineman”). The NFL, in consultation with the NFLPA, shall establish the rules and procedures under which a player may qualify as one of a Club’s eight Offensive Linemen. For the sake of clarity and avoidance of doubt, for any game for which a Club’s Active List includes fewer than eight Offensive Linemen, such Club’s Active List limit shall be forty-seven players. These limits may not be reduced by the Clubs for the duration of this Agreement; provided, however, that individual Clubs may carry fewer than forty-eight players on their Active List during the regular season or postseason, but no fewer than forty-four players.

Further illuminated by:

Section 4. Active and Inactive List Limit:
(a) During the regular season and postseason, a Club’s Active/Inactive List shall not exceed 53 players unless a Club has chosen to elevate either one or two players from its Practice Squad to its Active/Inactive List, in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article 33, Section 5 of this Agreement. In such instances, a Club’s Active/Inactive List shall not exceed 54 or 55 players, as may be applicable, during the period beginning with the player’s elevation to the Club’s Active/Inactive List, and ending with the player’s au- tomatic reversion to the Club’s Practice Squad. By way of example, if a Club’s Active List is 47 players, and the Club activates two players from its Practice Squad to its Active/In- active List, the Club’s game-day Inactive List will be eight players.
(b) In accordance with Article 33, Subsections 5(d) and 5(e), any elevation of a player from a Club’s Practice Squad to its Active/Inactive List must occur no earlier in the week than the final day for such player personnel transactions prior to the game for which the player is being elevated, but not later than the applicable player personnel transaction deadline for that day. Any player who has been elevated from a Club’s Practice Squad to its Active/Inactive List shall automatically revert to the Club’s Practice Squad on the first business day following the Club’s game. At that time, all Clubs shall be subject to the 53- player Active/Inactive List limit.

So the Inactive list can be anywhere from 5-8 players depending on whether and how many PS players are elevated and if there are 8 active OL.  When the Beats talk about Huntley and Covey as returners, I sometimes think they forget about the inactives because the 6th and sometimes 5th WR or 4th RB are likely inactive.  I don’t see either of them being so good at returning to warrant sitting Gainwell, or Reagor, if still on the team or Cain, for that matter.  As much as I dislike Reagor, Covey has shown zilch as a WR in the PS and Huntley can’t find a hole and doesn’t trust or read his blockers. (Heck, Gainwell struggles to read the blocks at times but he is head and shoulders above Huntley).  

I do buy the notion that Howie is at his best building from the bottom up.  He's at his best later in drafts when there is more skill and creativity, less of a 4 answer multiple choice off a consensus board.  

The Jeffrey/Desean/Peters/several drafts were all horrible.  I still rate the 12 personnel transition combined with the investment in Jeffrey/JJAW as the most unfathomably stupid and unforgivable thing he's done.  He gets too cute when he's already got a pretty good team.  But when the cupboard is bare and you can build from scratch, I think he has done a nice job.

20 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Is the free OL still available?  Thought that was a Covid rule so I went to look at the CBA. You are correct, as usual.  CBA states:

Active List: Beginning with the 2020 regular season, the Active List limit shall be increased from forty-six players per Club to forty-eight players per Club; provided, however, that such a Club’s Active List includes a minimum of eight players whose primary playing position is Center, Guard or Tackle (collectively, "Offensive Lineman”). The NFL, in consultation with the NFLPA, shall establish the rules and procedures under which a player may qualify as one of a Club’s eight Offensive Linemen. For the sake of clarity and avoidance of doubt, for any game for which a Club’s Active List includes fewer than eight Offensive Linemen, such Club’s Active List limit shall be forty-seven players. These limits may not be reduced by the Clubs for the duration of this Agreement; provided, however, that individual Clubs may carry fewer than forty-eight players on their Active List during the regular season or postseason, but no fewer than forty-four players.

Further illuminated by:

Section 4. Active and Inactive List Limit:
(a) During the regular season and postseason, a Club’s Active/Inactive List shall not exceed 53 players unless a Club has chosen to elevate either one or two players from its Practice Squad to its Active/Inactive List, in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article 33, Section 5 of this Agreement. In such instances, a Club’s Active/Inactive List shall not exceed 54 or 55 players, as may be applicable, during the period beginning with the player’s elevation to the Club’s Active/Inactive List, and ending with the player’s au- tomatic reversion to the Club’s Practice Squad. By way of example, if a Club’s Active List is 47 players, and the Club activates two players from its Practice Squad to its Active/In- active List, the Club’s game-day Inactive List will be eight players.
(b) In accordance with Article 33, Subsections 5(d) and 5(e), any elevation of a player from a Club’s Practice Squad to its Active/Inactive List must occur no earlier in the week than the final day for such player personnel transactions prior to the game for which the player is being elevated, but not later than the applicable player personnel transaction deadline for that day. Any player who has been elevated from a Club’s Practice Squad to its Active/Inactive List shall automatically revert to the Club’s Practice Squad on the first business day following the Club’s game. At that time, all Clubs shall be subject to the 53- player Active/Inactive List limit.

So the Inactive list can be anywhere from 5-8 players depending on whether and how many PS players are elevated and if there are 8 active OL.  When the Beats talk about Huntley and Covey as returners, I sometimes think they forget about the inactives because the 6th and sometimes 5th WR or 4th RB are likely inactive.  I don’t see either of them being so good at returning to warrant sitting Gainwell, or Reagor, if still on the team or Cain, for that matter.  As much as I dislike Reagor, Covey has shown zilch as a WR in the PS and Huntley can’t find a hole and doesn’t trust or read his blockers. (Heck, Gainwell struggles to read the blocks at times but he is head and shoulders above Huntley).  

That really works in the Eagles favor given Jurgens' lack of any experience beyond Center.  They get to activaste eight OL and get an extra active position player as well. Win-Win

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Indications seem to be Jackson is close (spotted working off to the side with trainers a few times as well as observing practices). We'll find out today how close he is. Probably best at this point in TC to just take it slow with him. He still needs to develop and wouldn't help much during the first 4 weeks anyway. 

That’s kind of the way I have seen it with Jackson.  If they like Calcaterra and Jackson isn’t complete in his development at TE, leave him on PUP.  He gets to attend the meetings and rehab, he just can’t practice.  But when allowed to come off PUP, he gets to practice for 21 days before they have to IR him for the season or activate. And this season, the minimum time on PUP has been shortened from six weeks to four.  Now, it used to be that after the sixth week a club had six weeks to activate a player, put a player on IR or release a player.  With the shorter four week PUP minimum, I can’t figure out if that period is still six weeks (requiring a decision by week 10) or if the decision still has to be made by week 12.  (Slynch would know.) I don’t think this impacts the Jackson decision as much as the Toth decision.  If I were Howie, I would PUP/Reserve both of them as they both showed some promise last season.

47 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Yup. Why they floated out the plan to release him but didn't actually do it, a hail mary attempt at getting someone to trade for him so they can get out of his contract. 

Another Raders regime change casualty may be DE Clelin Ferrell.

https://sports.yahoo.com/raiders-clelin-ferrell-danger-not-135544837.html

4 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Another Raders regime change casualty may be DE Clelin Ferrell.

https://sports.yahoo.com/raiders-clelin-ferrell-danger-not-135544837.html

He has been a bust for them.  Could see him as part of a trade but restructure so the Raiders retain some of the salary.  

27 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I do buy the notion that Howie is at his best building from the bottom up.  He's at his best later in drafts when there is more skill and creativity, less of a 4 answer multiple choice off a consensus board.  

The Jeffrey/Desean/Peters/several drafts were all horrible.  I still rate the 12 personnel transition combined with the investment in Jeffrey/JJAW as the most unfathomably stupid and unforgivable thing he's done.  He gets too cute when he's already got a pretty good team.  But when the cupboard is bare and you can build from scratch, I think he has done a nice job.

He makes the mistakes a lot of GMs in all sports make, that you're a couple players away so I'll just tweak things (extend a veteran, reach in the draft) to get over the top (or back to the top).

He's a smart guy who learns from his mistakes, the SB hangover I'm sure left a bad taste in his mouth - he overestimated a team based on a fluke season.

Notice he's far more focused on team building and retaining assets during this rebuild cycle v 2016.

But I also think a difference is the type of coaching staff, Reid at the end pushed for the dream team, Chip was not a development oriented HC (despite coming out of college), Pederson was a veteran's coach. I think Howie has also learned from that experience, if your coaching staff is more developmentally oriented, you can focus more on the draft and waiver wire and less on plug and play veterans.

They traded for Brown, but he's only 24, Tartt was waiver wire, Anderson waiver wire, Cain and Pascal, and the entire secondary it seems (or trades with late round draft picks).

The only money FAs are White (1yr), Bradberry (1yr) and Reddick (3yr), in their prime years.

Compare to 2016, when much of the team was built through free agency and long-term deals.

18 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

He has been a bust for them.  Could see him as part of a trade but restructure so the Raiders retain some of the salary.  

If they release him the contract stays with them, and any team signing him will negotiate their own terms.  Veterans minimum salary on a one-year deal is all he is likely to be able to sign for.

21 minutes ago, mattwill said:

If they release him the contract stays with them, and any team signing him will negotiate their own terms.  Veterans minimum salary on a one-year deal is all he is likely to be able to sign for.

Depending on the language in his contract. He gets paid just under $10M regardless. If there is no offset language he can get paid more than that - the $10M and whatever his new team offers. If there is offset language he'll just get the $10M.

2 hours ago, BigEFly said:

I am leaning towards Jack Anderson making the team.  I could actually see Anderson and Driscoll being the active OL during games, with Dillard, Jurgens and Opeta (if not on the PS) relegated to the inactive. That doesn’t mean that Anderson is better than Jurgens or even Opeta, although as to the latter, it looks pretty close. It doesn’t mean that Driscoll is better than Dillard or even Opeta although as to the latter, I think he is. Nope, I think it goes down to versatility.  Sure, Seumalo and Dickerson can play C, but you don’t want to move OL around mid game.  Jurgens, while looking great at C, hasn’t got any snaps at G.  Anderson has seen snaps at every IOL position.  Opeta is strictly a G.  Driscoll has seen snaps at G and both OT positions. Heaven forbid either LT or C go down.  Who plays reserve during a game doesn’t have to be the best replacement, just a player who can fill in for the remainder of a game.  If a full game absence, Dillard or Jurgens are the obvious choices.  But as to reserve players, Anderson and Driscoll seem the better option.  That way they can go seven active OL instead of 8. @justrelax, is that out on a limb too far?

Didn't see this until after @FranklinFldEBUpper replied. Good thing too, as I would probably have said something stupid.