20 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Special teams are a lost cause for you as well? Lol. 

I probably should’ve mentioned ST as well. they could use some fixing up on ST.  giving up a 63 yard kickoff return and a fake punt in back to back weeks. 

2 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

So according to you fans have to love him and think he walks on water or root against him. Got it.

No, not at all.  You can still think he has room to grow as a QB (I guarantee you he would be the first person to agree with that statement because that's the type of person/player he is) and also acknowledge that the young man has continued to develop and is playing at a very high level now.   

The Eagles are 6-0 and they have yet to play their "best game" imo.  Enjoy what this team and Hurts have done so far this season and give them the kudos they deserve.   And if Hurts has a bad game here or there, give the guy the opportunity to come back the next week and do better,  etc just like you probably would have done for most other Eagles' QB's.  

A lot of people on here won't give hurts the full credit because that would mean they have to admit to being wrong.

They will give backhanded credit but add something like, "but he's a RB that throws" blah blah blah

Suck it up, we're where we are because of him not in spite of him.

Our defence has absolutely stepped up too - and massive credit to howie for putting this team together. Feels like something special is happening.

coffee, black 

26 minutes ago, rrfierce said:

A lot of people on here won't give hurts the full credit because that would mean they have to admit to being wrong.

They will give backhanded credit but add something like, "but he's a RB that throws" blah blah blah

Suck it up, we're where we are because of him not in spite of him.

Our defence has absolutely stepped up too - and massive credit to howie for putting this team together. Feels like something special is happening.

Uh nope

4 hours ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

I think they were getting concerned with the abuse Hurts was getting from those sneaks.

Even though they had successfully run down the field on that drive, the call was a bit vanilla.

Well, it's about time.

10 hours ago, Doc S. said:

Shouldn't you be sleeping or something to ensure our W?

 

 

I think it only works with roster moves

Let's not fight over this at 6-0.

Some of us need to just throw out the details and enjoy being 6-0.

And others need to get over the fact that people have concerns about contending for a championship with the way the team is built.

I very much want to be dead wrong about Hurts and couldn't have been more excited by that reality in weeks 2+3.  I am now concerned that I wasn't that wrong, but we'll see how it goes.  My concern is that this team is most similar to the #1 seed Titan and Baltimore teams that dominated on the ground and then slipped up in the playoffs when they had to rely on throwing the football.  We are blazing our own trail here; teams built like this don't win titles.  Not for the last 25 years at least.  But at 6-0 with no one in the conference to stand up to us, it has been a fun ride.

 

Also...

Everyone stop arguing and put your (Lurie's) money where your mouth is.  At 6-0 and with this schedule, there is no chance the Eagles will (or should) change their offensive identity right now or that they will invest in QB in round 1 next year.

With an offense that utilizes the passing game and QB position in this fashion and with the current talent on the roster in need of contracts...how much money per year are you willing to invest in Hurts?

Running this offense surely needs to come with the perk of a discounted cap hit at the QB position.

14 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

😂  Here we go.  What does politics have to do with a fans QB preference?   I know you’re trying to race bait here but again, what does politics have to do with it?   

@MillerTime used the term in one of his previous posts.   I was using it to mostly reference "the politics" associated with drafting a 6'1 mobile QB when we already had the stereotypical 6'5 pocket passer with a canon arm in Carson Wentz.  And we won the Super Bowl with Nick Foles who was also a 6'5 pocket passer. 

(Drafting and eventually starting a QB with Hurts' skill set would be considered a more "progressive/risky" move vs sticking with the conventional pocket passer "conservative".  Then add all the drama/discord surrounding the move at the time....yeah "politics".)

4 hours ago, Diehardfan said:

So according to you fans have to love him and think he walks on water or root against him. You also spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about guys sitting on poles. Got it.

he sits on poles, LOL

5 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

@MillerTime used the term in one of his previous posts.   I was using it to mostly reference "the politics" associated with drafting a 6'1 mobile QB when we already had the stereotypical 6'5 pocket passer with a canon arm in Carson Wentz.  And we won the Super Bowl with Nick Foles who was also a 6'5 pocket passer. 

(Drafting and eventually starting a QB with Hurts' skill set would be considered a more "progressive/risky" move vs sticking with the conventional pocket passer "conservative".  Then add all the drama/discord surrounding the move at the time....yeah "politics".)

listen up, dont even use the word politics, are we clear?

9 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

@MillerTime used the term in one of his previous posts.   I was using it to mostly reference "the politics" associated with drafting a 6'1 mobile QB when we already had the stereotypical 6'5 pocket passer with a canon arm in Carson Wentz.  And we won the Super Bowl with Nick Foles who was also a 6'5 pocket passer. 

(Drafting and eventually starting a QB with Hurts' skill set would be considered a more "progressive/risky" move vs sticking with the conventional pocket passer "conservative".  Then add all the drama/discord surrounding the move at the time....yeah "politics".)

Running QB's are not remotely progressive.  They've been the "new wave" of QB's for about 30 years now.  Passing 70%+ of the time is progressive.

It usually doesn't work, then teams and the league get away from it, then a dynamic runner comes along for someone, and it gets called new all over again.

33 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

😂  Here we go.  What does politics have to do with a fans QB preference?   I know you’re trying to race bait here but again, what does politics have to do with it?   

Dog whistle

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

Running QB's are not remotely progressive.  They've been the "new wave" of QB's for about 30 years now.  Passing 70%+ of the time is progressive.

Right.  Cunningham, MCNabb and Vick were all "mobile QB’s” But it’s "progressive” in the sense that we just won a Super Bowl with 2 conventional pocket passers, one of which we gave a record contract to.  The "conservative” decision would have been to "stick with what works for us/ if it’s not broken, don’t fix it.”  Then add the discord  it caused… very similar to what happens in politics.

But don’t worry, I won’t use that word around here anymore…it’s obviously a sensitive topic…

The conference has plunged so deep into mediocrity that I'm not even sure who to root against during the bye week.  

NYG and Dallas...meh...we've got 3 games head to head against them and you have to believe in the Eagles taking care of their own business.

I do think the Rams will sort a few things out and will be a factor in the playoffs, but they are on a bye.  We have the Vikings head to head, but I think they are going to ring up a lot of wins this year...bye.  It would be nice to see the Bucs and Packers get driven under .500.  That pushes them completely out of the #1 seed discussion.

I'll probably root for our draft pick with the Cards on Thursday (although I don't think I hate myself enough to watch much of that game) and will pull for Doug against the Giants on Sunday.

I don't like unnecessary shuffling and I acknowledge that we won't be seeing Micah Parsons every week, but I think Dillard LT / Mailata RT when Lane goes down is going to be a better option than Mailata / Driscoll.

 

40 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I very much want to be dead wrong about Hurts and couldn't have been more excited by that reality in weeks 2+3.  I am now concerned that I wasn't that wrong, but we'll see how it goes.  My concern is that this team is most similar to the #1 seed Titan and Baltimore teams that dominated on the ground and then slipped up in the playoffs when they had to rely on throwing the football.  We are blazing our own trail here; teams built like this don't win titles.  Not for the last 25 years at least.  But at 6-0 with no one in the conference to stand up to us, it has been a fun ride.

Hurts is playing like a top 10 QB right now. He's good enough to get to the SB. 

Hurts' should not be extended given his playing style.

Both things can be true.

2 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

Just want to check in on how @RememberTheKoy is doing this morning with ELITZZZ defense letting up 26. with no take aways I might add.

While the "good" Eagles defense dominated for 41 minutes and had 3 turn overs. 

And I’d like to check in with you to see where we’re meeting pregame in two weeks and which Steelers jersey you’ll be wearing? 

4 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

And I’d like to check in with you to see where we’re meeting pregame in two weeks and which Steelers jersey you’ll be wearing? 

morning ma'am

2 minutes ago, olsilverhair said:

morning ma'am

You and hpenis watch the game together and do the popcorn trick?

7 hours ago, schuy7 said:

Damn, downundermike is PISSED that we won.

Not pissed in the slightest, it is a legitimate concern.

10 minutes ago, RLC said:

Hurts is playing like a top 10 QB right now. He's good enough to get to the SB. 

Hurts' should not be extended given his playing style.

Both things can be true.

I wouldn’t even go as far as to say he shouldn’t be extended.  I just want to see more.

6 hours ago, Outlaw said:

Mike…just enjoy a win man.

I am.  Doesn’t mean we can’t discuss what is an ongoing issue that needs to be cleaned up if you want the team to win in the playoffs.

5 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

Wrong, not even close. 

Schedule wise, bad teams are forced to play bad teams on sunday too. 

The only difference is, those games on sunday are hidden behind 7-9 other 1pm games. I mean theres a reason we have a local black out rule. 

 

You just don't get it.  TNF is the product being discussed, not the NFL, not the level of teams in the NFL.  TNF is a NATIONAL product.  It is a showcase game.  You know that it is meant to be a showcase game, because it is pumped up and marketed separately from the rest of the Sunday lineup.  The bad games on Sunday don't get NATIONAL exposure, they are tucked away and hidden from view everywhere but the local areas of those teams, and sometimes its even hidden from the local area with the blackout.  

TNF, aka, the forcing of every team to play on short rest, because they can't ask the good teams to play marquee matchups on short rest repeatedly through out the year.  They have to 'spread out the pain' to the entire league, and that's where you get the garbage matchups and bad teams getting a 'showcase'.  TNF is bad.  I laid out the lineup for you between TNF's slate of games and MNF's.  Dramatically different quality.  And if you look at the MNF games you'll notice that multiple teams show up there multiple times.  🤔.  Meanwhile, if you check the TNF schedule, you'll see not a single repeat of any team... ever.   🤔.   There's a reason for that.

 

TNF is successful for the NFL, because it provides a revenue stream that wouldn't exist without it.  And like I said, FOX and CBS don't care to lose one game a week, because they still get to broadcast in the host cities of the teams involved on TNF on Sunday afternoons, and a lot of those fans still tune in.  So, they pay the same as before, but now the NFL can get someone else to pay for another slate of games and rake in more money.   Forget that the matchups are pretty much lousy more often than not.  They are making money.   But, they only make money, if we tune in to that dreck.  It's one of the reasons I don't tune in for it, except for once a year.

 

One day you'll figure out that TNF is a separate entity, just as MNF and just as SNF, etc.  SNF, TNF and MNF are 'showcase games' each and every week, as much as CBS got to 'showcase' the Bills-Chiefs yesterday afternoon as their national broadcast game.  The NFL got that right and made sure that CBS got to showcase that matchup.  That type of matchup is what makes us fans.  If we were subjected to the likes of Chicago-Washington routinely, we'd never have become fans in the first place.  Those types of games should be visible only to the local audience, and not shared with the rest of the country.  TNF forces everyone that's hankering for NFL football to tune in.  The NFL knows their fan base are in large part sheep, and/or gambling addicts who can't not put some money on the game and then have a rooting interest... even if its fantasy players.  TNF remains a bad product, when it is looked at in isolation as just the game on the field, not the gambling impacts, the fantasy piece, etc.  Just the football that is played.  That is bad football, and it is broadcast nationally, by design.