1 hour ago, EazyEaglez said:

You think Tom Brady players grow on trees? Carson Strong is the next Brady? That’s just dumb bud. Right now the Eagles have confidence in their quarterback despite how you all feel. Here’s a hint for you though. All young quarterbacks struggle with reading defenses. That’s why they take coverage sacks, throw interceptions, and make bad plays. The special level quarterback in the NFL is quite low. You guys are expecting a 22-23 year old to be Tom Brady? No one ever put those types of expectations on Wentz even after MVP (actually the guy in Tampa now won it) season. 

Invoking Tom Brady is you intentionally taking the argument to a ridiculous place to deflect. Nick Foles beat him, but he did so throwing the ball. If reading a defense was his only issue we could sit here and only talk about that, but he can't throw or progress through his targets and decides to run instead. Speaking of Wentz he almost won MVP his second year instead of needing multiple rookie years of excuses. Someone doesn't have to be Brady to win, but they need to be able to throw the ball in the playoffs when defenses take away the ability to run and Hurts isn't capable of that against good teams as we saw in Tampa.

If your goal is to have someone who can get them to the playoffs and never win...congrats you have your guy. Most of us want more.

44 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

Invoking Tom Brady is you intentionally taking the argument to a ridiculous place to deflect. Nick Foles beat him, but he did so throwing the ball. If reading a defense was his only issue we could sit here and only talk about that, but he can't throw or progress through his targets and decides to run instead. Speaking of Wentz he almost won MVP his second year instead of needing multiple rookie years of excuses. Someone doesn't have to be Brady to win, but they need to be able to throw the ball in the playoffs when defenses take away the ability to run and Hurts isn't capable of that against good teams as we saw in Tampa.

If your goal is to have someone who can get them to the playoffs and never win...congrats you have your guy. Most of us want more.

Get the guy to multiple playoffs and not win is nearly every quarterback in Eagles history so what does that even mean? Other than Tom Brady what quarterbacks win multiple Super Bowls anymore? Who’s this special guy who’s gonna be the guy? An undrafted rookie you dopes brought the hype in? What’s Carson Strong winning a Super Bowl based off? What is that logic based in? Speaking of Brady do you even realize how much he was protected at a young age with a strong run game and defense? You all are incoherent in your arguments. 

4 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

Unlike you all and how you basically just trash Hurts, I’ve posted positive things about Wentz. No I’m not going to overhype a 4th string practice squad player because I don’t like the starting quarterback. Show me where I’ve done this. I call your bluff.

You say that there's a lot of Hurts hate. I think you're mistaking the dislike to Hurts' demonstrated skill set with the man. I don't feel any dislike for Jalen Hurts the man, he seems fine. I don't care for what he has shown as a Quarterback so far. They're not the same and I don't think I'm alone. Can he relearn what he's been doing for the past probably 10 years? Maybe but it ain't gonna be easy. Under duress we go back to what has worked in the past.

Laws of Learning                                         https://medicine.hofstra.edu/pdf/faculty/facdev/facdev_sixlaws_oflearning.pdf

Law of Exercise: Those things most repeated are the best learned...lots of review and
summary activities serve to help the mind learn

Law of Recency: Other things being equal, the things learned last will be best
remembered...repeat, restate, reemphasize the objectives.

We'll see if the second can overcome the first.

Another --

Primacy

Primacy, the state of being first, often creates a strong, almost unshakable impression and underlies the reason an instructor must teach correctly the first time and the student must learn correctly the first time.

2 minutes ago, eglz1 said:

You say that there's a lot of Hurts hate. I think you're mistaking the dislike to Hurts' demonstrated skill set with the man. I don't feel any dislike for Jalen Hurts the man, he seems fine. I don't care for what he has shown as a Quarterback so far. They're not the same and I don't think I'm alone. Can he relearn what he's been doing for the past probably 10 years? Maybe but it ain't gonna be easy.

Laws of Learning                                         https://medicine.hofstra.edu/pdf/faculty/facdev/facdev_sixlaws_oflearning.pdf

Law of Exercise: Those things most repeated are the best learned...lots of review and
summary activities serve to help the mind learn

Law of Recency: Other things being equal, the things learned last will be best
remembered...repeat, restate, reemphasize the objectives.

We'll see if the second can overcome the first.

This is football and not rocket science. There is only but so many things a defense can do to a quarterback. He learns from film study, practice, and experience. If he doesn’t pan out the Eagles will move on just like they did from Cunningham, Pete, McNabb, Hoying, Foles, Sanchez, Bradford, Wentz, and so forth. So you can ASSume he won’t get better, or you can hope he does. He’s already improved from year one to year two.

5 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

Congratulations on wanting the Eagles to win regardless to which quarterback plays is race bating now? 

Nope, but the bolded is

5 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

Nope. I want the Eagles to win no matter who the quarterback is. I’m not a prejudice dope like the rest of you. 

 

9 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

This is football and not rocket science. There is only but so many things a defense can do to a quarterback. He learns from film study, practice, and experience. If he doesn’t pan out the Eagles will move on just like they did from Cunningham, Pete, McNabb, Hoying, Foles, Sanchez, Bradford, Wentz, and so forth. So you can ASSume he won’t get better, or you can hope he does. He’s already improved from year one to year two.

These are true of any pursuit we didn't come out of the womb understanding. I think how to perform as a winning quarterback is one of those. Did he learn it correctly in his early training? Or did his athleticism render that unnecessary?

27 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

Get the guy to multiple playoffs and not win is nearly every quarterback in Eagles history so what does that even mean? Other than Tom Brady what quarterbacks win multiple Super Bowls anymore? Who’s this special guy who’s gonna be the guy? An undrafted rookie you dopes brought the hype in? What’s Carson Strong winning a Super Bowl based off? What is that logic based in? Speaking of Brady do you even realize how much he was protected at a young age with a strong run game and defense? You all are incoherent in your arguments. 

You like taking discussions to silly places. I'm not aiming for the history of SB failures from Eagles past. Don't settle for mediocrity, and you keep invoking Brady because you want to deflect and have nothing else.

To win a SB with a QB who can't throw like Hurts you need a generational defense like Tampa or the Ravens.

People know teams with great QB haven't won, so playing the Brady card and multiple SB is ridiculous. The point is winning the Super Bowl and Hurts isn't that guy. Throw out the straw man arguments as much as you want, but that's the bottom line.

You "anything can happen" people love him because he can get you to the playoffs against bad teams. The rest of us realize he needs to go because he won't win.

Carson Strong is so "Nasty Nate" that he'd have a real shot to win the Nasty Nate Award even over the actual Nasty Nate.

Do you think Carson Strong is negotiating between several teams right now?  Is that the reason 31 teams haven't swooped down to scoop him up?

Is it possible at all that the Eagles, a professional organization, really did know more about this player than the people posting here?

5 minutes ago, Vee said:

Do you think Carson Strong is negotiating between several teams right now?  Is that the reason 31 teams haven't swooped down to scoop him up?

Is it possible at all that the Eagles, a professional organization, really did know more about this player than the people posting here?

What are you even talking about? I haven't read anyone saying they don't know what they are talking about after cutting him. Most of us shrugged our shoulders and moved on.

Eagles don't know what they are talking about.

They will regret cutting Carson Strong.

QB Factory?

More like QB dummies . . . 

19 hours ago, ilikepargo said:

Carson Strong is so "Nasty Nate" that he'd have a real shot to win the Nasty Nate Award even over the actual Nasty Nate.

He either enters the Nasty Nate Hall of Fame first ballot or you rename the award, those are your choices.

4 minutes ago, Cochis_Calhoun said:

He either enters the Nasty Nate Hall of Fame first ballot or you rename the award, those are your choices.

As discussed in the blog, one of the criteria for Nasty Nate is to actually play extended time in the preseason and give false hope.  He did not, so we decided he does not qualify.

4 hours ago, downundermike said:

As discussed in the blog, one of the criteria for Nasty Nate is to actually play extended time in the preseason and give false hope.  He did not, so we decided he does not qualify.

But he far out-hyped those who did play a bit.  And they hype is the point.

A false criteria led to a bad conclusion in the blog.  Strong wins the award.  It's not close.

4 hours ago, ilikepargo said:

But he far out-hyped those who did play a bit.  And they hype is the point.

A false criteria led to a bad conclusion in the blog.  Strong wins the award.  It's not close.

A lot of it was fake hype just because of the Hurts fans

Putting the Hurts argument aside for a moment, if the Eagles take a QB in the next draft, what makes you think that:

1) He'll get the time needed to become most proficient in this offense (2-3 years)?

2) Sirianni and his staff be here in 2-3 years?

3) the eagles HC/GM will be patient enough for him to develop?

4) He'll be the "next big thing" and not another project or 1st round bust?

The NFL "QB problem" baffles the sh-- out of me.  They scramble around at draft time, trading a fortune to move up to pick a young QB only to throw him to the wolves, yang him in and out of the lineup, mess up his head.....then they fire the coaching staff, bring in the new guy and his new offense, and grow impatient that he's not a top 5 QB, eventually bench him and move on the following year.....

The other end of the spectrum is when a kid comes out of college, becomes a top 10 QB, gets to or even wins a super bowl and then wants a MONSTER contract which almost guarantees that the team won't win another super bowl.  

Then there's Brady.....who, a long time ago, realized that hamstringing a team with a huge contract wasn't the way to win championships. Only 1 QB in 22 years, who was in the top 5 in salary   in each particular year won a super bowl.  1 in 22 years.   Guys who won a super bowl on a rookie contract, never won it again after getting their huge contract.  Take a look at the QBs who won a super bowl over the years.....Brady and Stafford.......nowhere near top 5 money........Mahommes, Wilson, Flacco and I believe, Roethlisburger...rookie contracts, Aaron Rodgers won on a rookie contract even though he had signed an extension.  The there's the Manning brothers, Peyton didn't win one while being paid in the top 5.  Eli won 1 of his 2 being tied at #5 that year he won it.  He's the only one.    And let's not forget Mr Foles.......who won it on backup money.  The Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer.

S

17 minutes ago, birdman#12 said:

Putting the Hurts argument aside for a moment, if the Eagles take a QB in the next draft, what makes you think that:

1) He'll get the time needed to become most proficient in this offense (2-3 years)?

2) Sirianni and his staff be here in 2-3 years?

3) the eagles HC/GM will be patient enough for him to develop?

4) He'll be the "next big thing" and not another project or 1st round bust?

The NFL "QB problem" baffles the sh-- out of me.  They scramble around at draft time, trading a fortune to move up to pick a young QB only to throw him to the wolves, yang him in and out of the lineup, mess up his head.....then they fire the coaching staff, bring in the new guy and his new offense, and grow impatient that he's not a top 5 QB, eventually bench him and move on the following year.....

The other end of the spectrum is when a kid comes out of college, becomes a top 10 QB, gets to or even wins a super bowl and then wants a MONSTER contract which almost guarantees that the team won't win another super bowl.  

Then there's Brady.....who, a long time ago, realized that hamstringing a team with a huge contract wasn't the way to win championships. Only 1 QB in 22 years, who was in the top 5 in salary   in each particular year won a super bowl.  1 in 22 years.   Guys who won a super bowl on a rookie contract, never won it again after getting their huge contract.  Take a look at the QBs who won a super bowl over the years.....Brady and Stafford.......nowhere near top 5 money........Mahommes, Wilson, Flacco and I believe, Roethlisburger...rookie contracts, Aaron Rodgers won on a rookie contract even though he had signed an extension.  The there's the Manning brothers, Peyton didn't win one while being paid in the top 5.  Eli won 1 of his 2 being tied at #5 that year he won it.  He's the only one.    And let's not forget Mr Foles.......who won it on backup money.  The Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer.

S

I’ll take a stab at your 4 questions. 
 I’ll answer 4 first. There is never a guarantee. Not much more to say to that. 
 

1 and 2 tie in together and 3 kinda piggy backs off that. I’ve never gotten the impression from Lurie that he’s unreasonably impatient. Chip was his quickest firing, and that was due to extreme circumstances. I do believe as long as a QB isn’t a total flop, and a team is showing growth and responds well to the HC, Lurie will let the development happen as needed. Question 3 ties in because they likely don’t have the enormous pressure other owners would put on the HC/GM. Therefore, they likely can show more needed patience. 

29 minutes ago, birdman#12 said:

4) He'll be the "next big thing" and not another project or 1st round bust?

This is my answer.  That is why Howie pushed a 1st to next year in what is looking like a very strong QB class.

4 hours ago, birdman#12 said:

Putting the Hurts argument aside for a moment, if the Eagles take a QB in the next draft, what makes you think that:

1) He'll get the time needed to become most proficient in this offense (2-3 years)?

2) Sirianni and his staff be here in 2-3 years?

3) the eagles HC/GM will be patient enough for him to develop?

4) He'll be the "next big thing" and not another project or 1st round bust?

The NFL "QB problem" baffles the sh-- out of me.  They scramble around at draft time, trading a fortune to move up to pick a young QB only to throw him to the wolves, yang him in and out of the lineup, mess up his head.....then they fire the coaching staff, bring in the new guy and his new offense, and grow impatient that he's not a top 5 QB, eventually bench him and move on the following year.....

The other end of the spectrum is when a kid comes out of college, becomes a top 10 QB, gets to or even wins a super bowl and then wants a MONSTER contract which almost guarantees that the team won't win another super bowl.  

Then there's Brady.....who, a long time ago, realized that hamstringing a team with a huge contract wasn't the way to win championships. Only 1 QB in 22 years, who was in the top 5 in salary   in each particular year won a super bowl.  1 in 22 years.   Guys who won a super bowl on a rookie contract, never won it again after getting their huge contract.  Take a look at the QBs who won a super bowl over the years.....Brady and Stafford.......nowhere near top 5 money........Mahommes, Wilson, Flacco and I believe, Roethlisburger...rookie contracts, Aaron Rodgers won on a rookie contract even though he had signed an extension.  The there's the Manning brothers, Peyton didn't win one while being paid in the top 5.  Eli won 1 of his 2 being tied at #5 that year he won it.  He's the only one.    And let's not forget Mr Foles.......who won it on backup money.  The Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer.

S

Hurts is being given 3 years right now. I don't see why someone taken in the 1st round wouldn't get the same or more

I think Gannon is more on the hot seat than Nick. Maybe the OC is on the hot seat because he'll be calling plays and not Nick

They've been plenty patient with Hurts while knowing he still has the same weaknesses from college. Don't see why they wont be patient with the next QB

I doubt they draft someone in the 1st round that is a project. We wont know if he'll be a bust

Ian Book doesn’t have a number per eagles site.

This is killing my avatar game.

Anyone see him at practice yet?

No need to draft a QB early in the first. Ian Book is here.

Clemson EDGE Myles Murphy in the first round.

1 hour ago, CouchKing said:

Ian Book doesn’t have a number per eagles site.

This is killing my avatar game.

Anyone see him at practice yet?

No need to draft a QB early in the first. Ian Book is here.

Clemson EDGE Myles Murphy in the first round.

Book an RPO style quarterback that is shorter than Hurts, slower than Hurts, weaker arm than Hurts, and less accurate than Hurts. Wonder why you like this guy? 😂

Can we officially clos the Carson Weak thread now too?

1 minute ago, EazyEaglez said:

Book an RPO style quarterback that is shorter than Hurts, slower than Hurts, weaker arm than Hurts, and less accurate than Hurts. Wonder why you like this guy? 😂

It’s a mockery of my avatar use of any QB other than Hurts. I already have the Minshew avatar ready to go, but wanted to hold off until he starts later this year.

17 hours ago, birdman#12 said:

Putting the Hurts argument aside for a moment, if the Eagles take a QB in the next draft, what makes you think that:

1) He'll get the time needed to become most proficient in this offense (2-3 years)?

2) Sirianni and his staff be here in 2-3 years?

3) the eagles HC/GM will be patient enough for him to develop?

4) He'll be the "next big thing" and not another project or 1st round bust?

The NFL "QB problem" baffles the sh-- out of me.  They scramble around at draft time, trading a fortune to move up to pick a young QB only to throw him to the wolves, yang him in and out of the lineup, mess up his head.....then they fire the coaching staff, bring in the new guy and his new offense, and grow impatient that he's not a top 5 QB, eventually bench him and move on the following year.....

The other end of the spectrum is when a kid comes out of college, becomes a top 10 QB, gets to or even wins a super bowl and then wants a MONSTER contract which almost guarantees that the team won't win another super bowl.  

Then there's Brady.....who, a long time ago, realized that hamstringing a team with a huge contract wasn't the way to win championships. Only 1 QB in 22 years, who was in the top 5 in salary   in each particular year won a super bowl.  1 in 22 years.   Guys who won a super bowl on a rookie contract, never won it again after getting their huge contract.  Take a look at the QBs who won a super bowl over the years.....Brady and Stafford.......nowhere near top 5 money........Mahommes, Wilson, Flacco and I believe, Roethlisburger...rookie contracts, Aaron Rodgers won on a rookie contract even though he had signed an extension.  The there's the Manning brothers, Peyton didn't win one while being paid in the top 5.  Eli won 1 of his 2 being tied at #5 that year he won it.  He's the only one.    And let's not forget Mr Foles.......who won it on backup money.  The Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer.

S

The problem with including Brady in any discussion is he is the exception and not the norm. He has been in about 50% of the SB's during his career and won 7 of them. Those numbers aren't repeatable. And they skew things quite a bit when you have one QB making ~50% of the SB's driving metrics like QB contracts, team construction, and team dynamics. I'd rather compare to every team that made it to the SB or AFC/NFC championship that wasn't a Brady led team. Those are more realistic metrics.

Aaron Rodgers wasn't on his rookie contract. He was already extended. People forget Rodgers was drafted in 2003 and didn't start until like 2008. He was already well past his rookie contract when he won the SB in 2011.

QB remains the most important position and teams without a decent QB don't even have a chance at sniffing the playoffs. Teams are wise to spend a lot of cap at the QB position to make sure their QB stays. I'd rather make the argument that teams need to do a better job at drafting other positions and getting them on cheaper rookie contracts. And building good depth through rookie contracts. With some key free agent signings.

Teams that have a franchise QB on a rookie contract essentially have free reign to do whatever they want when it comes to signing free agents. And they can bomb multiple drafts and still be fine. The problem is when they continue that behavior beyond re-signing their franchise QB to a mega contract. Teams cannot continue to draft poorly beyond that. That window of careless spending ends. They need to draft well and be savvy with free agent signings. Most teams just don't have the front offices to do that.

I saw that Carson Strong was getting a workout with the Broncos.

I'd like to get some inside scoop on how he did.

 

On 9/1/2022 at 2:03 PM, EazyEaglez said:

This is football and not rocket science. There is only but so many things a defense can do to a quarterback. He learns from film study, practice, and experience. If he doesn’t pan out the Eagles will move on just like they did from Cunningham, Pete, McNabb, Hoying, Foles, Sanchez, Bradford, Wentz, and so forth. So you can ASSume he won’t get better, or you can hope he does. He’s already improved from year one to year two.

No not really