11 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

You still aren’t making a point. Pessimism is "Hurts will suck” and realism is "Hurts hasn’t been good”

Projection is "Hurts hasn’t been good.”  Realistically Hurts has been good … but not good enough to satisfy the desires of a substantial portion of the fan base.

1 minute ago, mattwill said:

Projection is "Hurts hasn’t been good.”  Realistically Hurts has been good … but not good enough to satisfy the desires of a substantial portion of the fan base.

But doesn't that mean he hasn't been good?

2 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Projection is "Hurts hasn’t been good.”  Realistically Hurts has been good … but not good enough to satisfy the desires of a substantial portion of the fan base.

Hurts has been average at best

2 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Projection is "Hurts hasn’t been good.”  Realistically Hurts has been good … but not good enough to satisfy the desires of a substantial portion of the fan base.

Hurts hasn't been good as a passer.  Hurts hasn't been good at seeing the field.  Hurts hasn't been good at playing from the pocket.  Hurts has been good at running.

That's the reality. And it is corroborated by a very good NFL DC, while he's not playing the PC game of saying nice things about your opponent.  Instead, he's given an honest assessment of Hurts' ability/inability to play from the pocket. 

34 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Counter...

If he's viewed as good enough to be a starter elsewhere, the Eagles won't pay to match that salary if he's the backup swing OT... unless Johnson's health comes into major question.

If he's not viewed as a starter elsewhere, the notion of getting even a 2nd round pick for him in trade from Dallas or any other team is a moot point, because no team would offer that.

If he IS viewed that highly now, take the trade, because it is maximizing his value to this team.  Driscoll offers more versatility than Dillard as a swing player anyway.  Keeping Dillard, his max value will be a 3rd round pick in 2024, basically a 4th for that matter. Meaning, that pick is just outside top 100, give or take a handful of spots, and could be canceled out by another signing... roughly a top 5th round pick value equivalence in 2023.  Meanwhile, trading him for a second makes him worth roughly a top 50 pick... give or take a dozen.  Huge difference.

I agree with this analysis.  There is a risk if he is traded, but it is an acceptable risk in my opinion … perhaps even a risk that can be mitigated.  A 2nd from Dallas would be good value to the Eagles.  I also do not believe that Dallas is only one LT away from being better than the Eagles.  The holes in their OL even with Dillard are major.  Their lack of receivers for Dak to throw to is also major.

Make the trade Howie.

Nicks laughing because Kelce just went over the entire Eagles playbook in 1 minute.

7 minutes ago, Shalodeep said:

But doesn't that mean he hasn't been good?

In the eyes of some, yes.  In the eyes of others, no.  The problem is not with his performance, but rather his style of play.

9 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Hurts has been average at best

What are your criteria of judgment when you come to that conclusion?  Would the 2021 Eagles have had a better record with a different second year QB?  If so, which second year QB?

6 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Nicks laughing because Kelce just went over the entire Eagles playbook in 1 minute.

Lol. I watched it and wondered how soon it would be before anyone in here turned it into a Hurts joke. You’re quick. 

Just now, mattwill said:

In the eyes of some, yes.  In the eyes of others, no.  The problem is not with his performance, but rather his style of play.

The issue is his style of play leads to his performance.  When asked/forced to be a pure pocket passer, he struggles greatly.  When allowed to run around and improvise he does well, not great, but well.

1 minute ago, mattwill said:

What are your criteria of judgment when you come to that conclusion?  Would the 2021 Eagles have had a better record with a different second year QB?  If so, which second year QB?

Herbert, zero doubt.

8 minutes ago, mattwill said:

In the eyes of some, yes.  In the eyes of others, no.  The problem is not with his performance, but rather his style of play.

No. My issues with him are strictly performance related. Namely the playoff game. I don’t care if we have a running QB as long as they can read the field, go through progressions, and make accurate throws on time - all while trusting their pocket. Hurts ditching a clean pocket is perhaps my biggest issue with him, especially when he only looked at his first read. The Bucs put the book out on him. We will see how he fares this year.

9 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Hurts hasn't been good as a passer.  Hurts hasn't been good at seeing the field.  Hurts hasn't been good at playing from the pocket.  Hurts has been good at running.

That's the reality. And it is corroborated by a very good NFL DC, while he's not playing the PC game of saying nice things about your opponent.  Instead, he's given an honest assessment of Hurts' ability/inability to play from the pocket. 

And "playing from the pocket” is first and foremost a style issue.  
 

I don’t disagree with your conclusions, but NFL history has numerous successful QBs who were not first and foremost "pocket passers”

1 minute ago, Texas Eagle said:

No. My issues with him are strictly performance related. Namely the playoff game. I don’t care if we have a running QB, but they also need to be able to read the field, go through progressions, and make accurate throws on time - all while trusting their pocket. Hurts ditching a clean pocket is perhaps my biggest issue with him, especially when he only looked at his first read. The Bucs put the book out on him. We will see how he fares this year.

One game

1 minute ago, mattwill said:

And "playing from the pocket” is first and foremost a style issue.  
 

I don’t disagree with your conclusions, but NFL history has numerous successful QBs who were not first and foremost "pocket passers”

One game

The biggest game

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

The issue is his style of play leads to his performance.  When asked/forced to be a pure pocket passer, he struggles greatly.  When allowed to run around and improvise he does well, not great, but well.

Herbert, zero doubt.

And how many second year QBs were there in the NFL last year?

2 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I don’t disagree with your conclusions, but NFL history has numerous successful QBs who were not first and foremost "pocket passers”

Which have won a Super Bowl? Can’t be a long list

5 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

The issue is his style of play leads to his performance.  When asked/forced to be a pure pocket passer, he struggles greatly.  When allowed to run around and improvise he does well, not great, but well.

Agreed on both points.  
 

Forced and allowed are the key operative words in your very valid point.

1 minute ago, Texas Eagle said:

Which have won a Super Bowl? Can’t be a long list

The list of QBs of any stripe that have won a Super Bowl is a very short list.

3 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

The Bucs put the book out on him. We will see how he fares this year.

I would argue the Bucs defense was much more effective against our oline than our qb. Bad protections, inability to get to the second level in the run game, etc. 

Also, if we are going over players who had a bad game, Goedert needs to be in the conversation. 

I think it is pretty low-level thinking to look at the Bucs game and come away with the conclusion that just changing the qb would have solved all the problems. 

9 minutes ago, mattwill said:

And "playing from the pocket” is first and foremost a style issue.  
 

I don’t disagree with your conclusions, but NFL history has numerous successful QBs who were not first and foremost "pocket passers”

Who?  Please name 3 that couldn't be counted to lead their team from behind by throwing the ball.

Hurts isn't a good passer outside the pocket either, BTW.  He is first and foremost a guy who runs when the chips are down or he feels a big play is needed.  He doesn't trust his arm as much as he trusts his legs.  That hasn't changed yet. And in the one 3rd down in the PS, he gave up on a routine throw to an open WR to run to his right and take an unnecessary hit. Without the penalty the Eagles end up pointing in that one drive he led so that he could scamper for 1 yards on 3rd and 5, rage than throw a 5 yard out to his left. 

2 minutes ago, mattwill said:

The list of QBs of any stripe that have won a Super Bowl is a very short list.

So you can’t think of any in other words

11 minutes ago, mattwill said:

What are your criteria of judgment when you come to that conclusion?  Would the 2021 Eagles have had a better record with a different second year QB?  If so, which second year QB?

Burrow and Herbert come immediately to mind 

2 hours ago, justrelax said:

Something worth mentioning regarding the Eagles declining Dillard's fifth-year option. It does not preclude them re-signing him or extending him.  As I read it, had they exercised the option, they would have to pay him the average of the 3d through 25th highest OT salaries. Were he a starter that would be a no-brainer, but he's not. He could be, elsewhere. However, by declining the option the Eagles may well be able to retain him at a lower salary. They can always offer to match and it seems extremely unlikely to me that another team will blow the doors off on a guy who has played so little and missed a season due to injury.

Maybe they trade him. Maybe they keep him for 2022. And maybe they re-sign or extend him beyond 2022.

Just sayin'.

If you were Dillard why on earth would you want to stay here? Not like we tag him

6 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

I would argue the Bucs defense was much more effective against our oline than our qb. Bad protections, inability to get to the second level in the run game, etc. 

Also, if we are going over players who had a bad game, Goedert needs to be in the conversation. 

I think it is pretty low-level thinking to look at the Bucs game and come away with the conclusion that just changing the qb would have solved all the problems. 

He cant read

20 minutes ago, mattwill said:

In the eyes of some, yes.  In the eyes of others, no.  The problem is not with his performance, but rather his style of play.

My issue is his decision in the rpos,his lack of fundamentals and mechanics within the pocket, and his below average throwing skills. Yours?

7 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

I would argue the Bucs defense was much more effective against our oline than our qb. Bad protections, inability to get to the second level in the run game, etc. 

Also, if we are going over players who had a bad game, Goedert needs to be in the conversation. 

I think it is pretty low-level thinking to look at the Bucs game and come away with the conclusion that just changing the qb would have solved all the problems. 

How many wide open players did he miss that game? Was that more Mailata’s or Kelcie’s fault? Or maybe Lane?