1 hour ago, Bacarty2 said:

It's crazy you cant look at him with unbiased eyes

Would you PLEASE stop responding to him!  It is a waste of your time ... and everyone else's time.

GTD for Mailata 

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I'd be good with less. Dissolve the bottom team from each conference and spread the players to boost up talent.

It's not going to happen, but it would be a better product. 

I've watched NFL (and AFL) football in the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's and now the 20's.  The talent on the teams has consistently improved over that period.  The average NFL team in the 20's would consistently beat the average NFL team in any and all of the prior decades.  The worst NFL team in the 20's would consistently beat the worst NFL team in any and all of the prior decades.  The best teams of the respective decades is a bit more unclear because the earlier decades did not have a Salary Cap.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I'm not talking about Thursday, or any day. Just that there's too many bad or mediocre teams in general and talent is somewhat spread too thin.  

See above.

1 hour ago, BigEFly said:

Or work with spring leagues to develop more depth of talent.

See above.  The issue is not talent.

1 hour ago, BigEFly said:

How about Jobe to IR? Maddox is getting close to recovery and they can elevate McCain or Chachere.

I like that idea.

Nice try by Quincy Avery try to sell the "narrative” that Hurts work ethic and intangibles are north worthy. Pure propangands to cover up the truth about the selfish glory seeking Hurt. Just give it time, you will see!!

2 minutes ago, 2x2x2x said:

Nice try by Quincy Avery try to sell the "narrative” that Hurts work ethic and intangibles are north worthy. Pure propangands to cover up the truth about the selfish glory seeking Hurt. Just give it time, you will see!!

 

 

Jalen really needs to take some lessons from Carson on how to carry himself around the team. He has this team on the brink becoming completely toxic internally. 

13 minutes ago, 2x2x2x said:

Nice try by Quincy Avery try to sell the "narrative” that Hurts work ethic and intangibles are north worthy. Pure propangands to cover up the truth about the selfish glory seeking Hurt. Just give it time, you will see!!

You guys are still going on about this?

Private QB coach says good things about QB paying him. More at 11. 

👍

Rude

2 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Colts?   We had a bet about the Saints.  Not the Colts.   You better check again bud.  

My bad, you are correct.  That was another bacarty bet

34 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

 

Jalen really needs to take some lessons from Carson on how to carry himself around the team. He has this team on the brink becoming completely toxic internally. 

Wait what? Aren't you Hurts' biggest cheerleader?

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Rude

I asked my 20 something nerd son about the thumbs up thing and his response was  "I have never met a person who was offended by a thumbs up. They (daily mail) 100% fell for the bait"

Could be that the gen Z's are trolling the boomers with this take

1 hour ago, mattwill said:

I've watched NFL (and AFL) football in the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's and now the 20's.  The talent on the teams has consistently improved over that period.  The average NFL team in the 20's would consistently beat the average NFL team in any and all of the prior decades.  The worst NFL team in the 20's would consistently beat the worst NFL team in any and all of the prior decades.  The best teams of the respective decades is a bit more unclear because the earlier decades did not have a Salary Cap.

See above.

See above.  The issue is not talent.

The 00’s and 10’s teams are the cream of the crop imo. This new generation can hold the past 10 years jock. I said it last night, we were spoiled from 2000-2020 by the era of the qb. The bottom of the barrel teams (bears of this year for example) make the expansion Texans look good. 

1 hour ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

Sills is Stoutland's pet project for this year. The Eagles kept him over Anderson and Awosika, both of whom are good enough to be on active rosters of other teams. They made a special point about how versatile is. I would venture to say there is zero chance he would be cut.

I will not doubt Jeff Stoutland.

I will not doubt Jeff Stoutland

I will not doubt Jeff Stout...

2 hours ago, BigEFly said:

Alright, which one of you is Ed Kracz.  This is like the third time this season that we are discussing something in here and he posts about it a few minutes later.

https://twitter.com/kracze/status/1580957966215151634?s=61&t=GDivNrD1j85vdg8Gy0uRUw

Geez, that's spot on from the exact conversation we've been having.  Hell, he even makes the exact same points a few of us have discussed over the last few days.

38 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Wait what? Aren't you Hurts' biggest cheerleader?

Would you PLEASE stop responding to him!  It is a waste of your time ... and everyone else's time.

38 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Wait what? Aren't you Hurts' biggest cheerleader?

Your sarcasm meter is broken.

1 hour ago, mattwill said:

I've watched NFL (and AFL) football in the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's and now the 20's.  The talent on the teams has consistently improved over that period.  The average NFL team in the 20's would consistently beat the average NFL team in any and all of the prior decades.  The worst NFL team in the 20's would consistently beat the worst NFL team in any and all of the prior decades.  The best teams of the respective decades is a bit more unclear because the earlier decades did not have a Salary Cap.

See above.

See above.  The issue is not talent.

It's a completely different style.  Players from today are physically more imposing, faster, etc.   However, players back then also played when they had offseason jobs because it didn't pay as well, couldn't afford private chefs to give them the absolute best in terms of nutrition, etc.  And the game itself has moved to a much more pass heavy era.   But, if the DBs of the 1960s and 1970s could play by their rules... today's WRs wouldn't be running nearly as carefree as they do now... they'd have a harder time with their routes.  Nighttrain Lane might very well decapitate some WRs in today's game.   Equally, the QBs of today, by the rules of the 1960s would be much more likely to release the ball very early because the defenses would be hunting them like lions going after a wildebeest.   Again, today's QBs don't have to put up with much contact compared to yesteryear.  And what would Deacon Jones' headslap do to today's LTs that have never experienced such a thing?  

 

Flip the script to the offensive side advantage of the past to today's game... crack back blocks are outlawed, the high-lows that happened frequently are now gone, so DTs can attack the LOS without having to be so wary to protect their knees.    

 

In other words... its not just a fair comparison.  The game has morphed and changed too much to really get a handle on who would do what to whom.  Best not to compare eras.  Just no real way to do it properly.

5 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Geez, that's spot on from the exact conversation we've been having.  Hell, he even makes the exact same points a few of us have discussed over the last few days.

The beat/blogger/podcasters absolutely lurk here (or maybe even actively post?). I was listening to NFC Mixtape pod (BLG and RJ Ochoa, a cowboys fan) and RJ said something like "I saw on the internet the argument that Eagles were possibly holding back against the Cardinals to hide the gameplan for the Cowboys" and it was like a day after that was posted in here. 

41 minutes ago, Next_Up said:

I asked my 20 something nerd son about the thumbs up thing and his response was  "I have never met a person who was offended by a thumbs up. They (daily mail) 100% fell for the bait"

Could be that the gen Z's are trolling the boomers with this take

  

44 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Wait what? Aren't you Hurts' biggest cheerleader?

 

I'm poking fun at the users here that in their desperation to hate Hurts have tried to claim throughout this season that Hurts is selfish and it's going to cause his teammates to turn on him. 

29 minutes ago, Wentz_Era said:

The 00’s and 10’s teams are the cream of the crop imo. This new generation can hold the past 10 years jock. I said it last night, we were spoiled from 2000-2020 by the era of the qb. The bottom of the barrel teams (bears of this year for example) make the expansion Texans look good. 

You are looking at teams.  The comment that was made that I responded to was about the talent ... specifically proposing to eliminate several teams so the number of teams matches the quality of available talent.  The problem is not the availability of talent. 

The problem is three-fold (1) more talented players are playing against more talented players which has a cancelling effect, and (2) the use of the talent by coaching staffs hasn't improved as much as the talent has improved, and (3) coaching staffs are on much, much shorter leashes now than they were in past decades, as a result there is much less stability/continuity in coaches.  Hurts' history with the coaching turnover he has experienced is a very clear indication of that.

1 minute ago, mattwill said:

You are looking at teams.  The comment that was made that I responded to was about the talent ... specifically proposing to eliminate several teams so the number of teams matches the quality of available talent.  The problem is not the availability of talent. 

The problem is three-fold (1) more talented players are playing against more talented players which has a cancelling effect, and (2) the use of the talent by coaching staffs hasn't improved as much as the talent has improved, and (3) coaching staffs are on much, much shorter leashes now than they were in past decades, as a result there is much less stability/continuity in coaches.  Hurts' history with the coaching turnover he has experienced is a very clear indication of that.

. The population of the entire country has also grown, so is it really a higher percentage of the population playing football today than before?   I don't think so.

4 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

It's a completely different style.  Players from today are physically more imposing, faster, etc.   However, players back then also played when they had offseason jobs because it didn't pay as well, couldn't afford private chefs to give them the absolute best in terms of nutrition, etc.  And the game itself has moved to a much more pass heavy era.   But, if the DBs of the 1960s and 1970s could play by their rules... today's WRs wouldn't be running nearly as carefree as they do now... they'd have a harder time with their routes.  Nighttrain Lane might very well decapitate some WRs in today's game.   Equally, the QBs of today, by the rules of the 1960s would be much more likely to release the ball very early because the defenses would be hunting them like lions going after a wildebeest.   Again, today's QBs don't have to put up with much contact compared to yesteryear.  And what would Deacon Jones' headslap do to today's LTs that have never experienced such a thing? 

Flip the script to the offensive side advantage of the past to today's game... crack back blocks are outlawed, the high-lows that happened frequently are now gone, so DTs can attack the LOS without having to be so wary to protect their knees.   

In other words... its not just a fair comparison.  The game has morphed and changed too much to really get a handle on who would do what to whom.  Best not to compare eras.  Just no real way to do it properly.

All of the above are true ... and some of what you say are reasons why the talent of today is significantly better than it was in the past.  The issues of the changes in rules doesn't affect the talent level.  It affects how the talent is used by the coaching staffs.