1 hour ago, mattwill said:

In thinking about the succession to Lane Johnson, and thanks to the discussion about Pick #5 and Pick #20, I ran into this interesting prospect profile for a possibility at pick #20

18. *Paris Johnson Jr., OT, Ohio State (6-6, 315)
As a right guard last season, Johnson earned second-team All-Big Ten honors from the league coaches. Now, the rising junior will protect Stroud’s blindside in 2022. The Cincinnati native is currently a projection at left tackle, with questions about his timing and technique out in space. But with his size, strength and fluid movement skills, Johnson should be more natural at left tackle and could translate a breakout 2022 season into an early-round draft pick.

These two Edge prospects are interesting as possibilities at #20 as well.

20. *Isaiah Foskey, edge, Notre Dame (6-5, 260)
An impressive athlete for his size, Foskey can line up across the front seven and win in a multitude of ways. As a pass rusher, he threatens the corner and forces blockers to respect his edge speed, which unlocks his go-to power moves — specifically, his long-arm techniques. Foskey has a crafty understanding of how to use his length to soften the edge and leverage the point of attack with one arm to bully blockers.

21. Tyree Wilson, edge, Texas Tech (6-6, 270)
In new defensive coordinator Tim DeRuyter’s hybrid 3-4 scheme, Wilson is listed as an outside linebacker on the Tech roster. He’s expected to split his time between standing up and playing with his hand on the ground. Regardless, his main goal each snap will be to affect the quarterback. Does he lack refinement? Yes, but his length and raw power are terrific foundational traits.

Those edge guys are too tall, Howie likes him some midget fast balls.

Hopefully eagles have grown out of the fast defenders means short defenders phase and they can get some length and speed.

18 hours ago, BigEFly said:

So basically this is a tall tale about how some wish the actual League was as opposed to any historical accuracy. I think I will pass.   I grew up on westerns.  But my great grandfather lived the time.  He would laugh at everyone wearing a six gun. Back in that time when average folk were pulling $300-$500 a year, no one was spending $17 on a Colt or $.50 for a box of cartridges. He lived just across the river from Indian Territory and his father traded across the river.  I have his dad’s flintlock rifle.  

My dad, despite being practically blind in one eye, was a crack shot.  I asked him how he became so good.  He pointed out how much a shot cost in the thirties and that they couldn’t afford to waste a single one.

After talking with both, I never watched westerns quite the same way although I still watch them. Nowadays, I laugh at the women’s dress and hairstyles as part of it.  

We are warping our understanding of our roots. I think I will stick with the original movie, despite its flaws, and pass on the new series.  

Another (what I think is accurate) fact about the 'wild west'. I can't quote chapter and verse on this because I read it years ago and don't have the source though it seemed credible. There were more murders in New York City than there were documented along the frontier during the frontier's bloodiest year, sometime in the 1870s is what I recall.

@mattwill, after back to back iOL in RD2, we should pass on OL early in next years draft. It's a bad class, and other positions require more helps. Also, at some point, have to trust Stout. We need a 3rd OT, not a starter.

 

13 minutes ago, UK Eagle said:

At least we'd have a productive WR3 from that trade.  Like Quez, but eminently upgradeable....

 

Quez is better than Agholor.  

19 minutes ago, Utebird said:

Not when the predator dies😄

But when the predator kills some animals, a bear some wolves ect...

Looks cool though and I've heard it's good, maybe I'll just fast forward past the parts where he kills the animals 

If I wanted to see wild animals die I'd watch Nat Geo or Disney...

 

 

 

Good god you are soft

1 minute ago, Sack that QB said:

 

 

Andy Weidl the new Joe Douglas for Dillard trade rumors.  

2 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

 

Dillard for Minkah 

For all of you who have not noticed, the EMB pigskin pickem and survivor pool links are in my signature.

 

That'll show him

3 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

Good god you are soft

So is your mom.

 

9 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Quez is better than Agholor.  

Hot take. 

4 minutes ago, Utebird said:

So is your mom.

 

Well she is 71 so if thats your taste…

2 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

What’s the pigskin Pick em?

Pick games every week.

 

Side note, I was just cleaning out all the attachments in my account, bacarty has put me on ignore at least 5 different times.

Interesting Araiza won't play. If it was the regular season I wonder if it would've been different.

I think the debate on what to do in these situations is interesting.

Should anyone accused of something heinous not be allowed to play no questions asked? That opens the door for people to accuse someone of anything to get them booted from the team until a long investigation is done. Like some fan of an opposing team could just accuse Rodgers of assault for the hell of it a day before a playoff game.

Should it be based on the nature of the report and how credible it comes off? For example, don't take accusations as seriously if it's just one random person who is like "One day in Vegas ____ assaulted me!" with no details or context, but take reports that have multiple alleged victims on record claiming the same thing.

Or do you do nothing at all until the investigation is complete? To me #1 is a non-starter. The precedent set is too bad to that. It's between 2 and 3. In most instances, I lean #3, because I believe strongly in due process, even for non criminal cases. There's nothing to be lost by allowing someone to play until an investigation is complete. But I think there should be some instances where if the evidence is so overwhelming, like a dozen people accusing someone of something, all with similar allegations backed up by specifics, where exceptions can be made.

As mich as there is pressure to over react immediately, you have to let the process play out

15 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

Hot take. 

 

Not really.  Faster and better hands.  Same people here that would say Agholor is better I would guess also feel like Mac Jones is better than Hurts.  Yet Quez as the 3rd WR on this team last year out produced Agholor last year when Agholor was the Patriots #1WR. 

 

3 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Not really.  Faster and better hands.  Same people here that would say Agholor is better I would guess also feel like Mac Jones is better than Hurts.  Yet Quez as the 3rd WR on this team last year out produced Agholor last year when Agholor was the Patriots #1WR. 

 

OMG, do you know anything about football.

Jakobi Meyers was the #1 WR, Kendrick Bourne was the #2.

 

1 minute ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

Not really.  Faster and better hands.  Same people here that would say Agholor is better I would guess also feel like Mac Jones is better than Hurts.  Yet Quez as the 3rd WR on this team last year out produced Agholor last year when Agholor was the Patriots #1WR. 

 

The Patriots offense in general was terrible last year. The year before with a good QB Agholor had his best season. 

Agholor is an underachiever and Quez is an overachiever but it’s too early to tell who is better than who. 

47 minutes ago, Utebird said:

Most likely yes, I'm a cryer, what can I say once the water works start going it's tough to turn it off ...

The only film that makes me cry is The Miracle Worker, at the end. Gets me every time.

12 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Should it be based on the nature of the report and how credible it comes off? For example, don't take accusations as seriously if it's just one random person who is like "One day in Vegas ____ assaulted me!" with no details or context, but take reports that have multiple alleged victims on record claiming the same thing.

Case by case basis.  It's impossible to create a manual for stuff like this.  Reading the available information on the accuser's version events -- it seems like a criminal complaint would have/should have been filed, a "rape kit" collected as evidence, etc.  The absence of this would/should require an explanation from the accuser.

4 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

Case by case basis.  It's impossible to create a manual for stuff like this.  Reading the available information on the accuser's version events -- it seems like a criminal complaint would have/should have been filed, a "rape kit" collected as evidence, etc.  The absence of this would/should require an explanation from the accuser.

I do believe in a case by case basis model, but with the NFLPA's involvement in matters, they could have a strong case to dispute if there's no overall consistent methodology. For example, two players get accused of a similar incident. One looks more damning based off the accuser's words than the other. One can't play, the other does. The NFLPA would step in and go wait a minute. You have two guys both accused of something unsubstantiated by evidence, both he said/she said. Why can't one play and the other can?

I'm just now reading about the Tyrone Smith injury.  WOW that sounds painful.  He's a top talent at LT but his injury luck is horrible.  I can't imagine having my hamstring ripped off the knee. Damn.

Agholor still has unfortunate legacy with the Eagles despite 9 catches for 84 yards in a super bowl win