Also no one says Dallas has a weak schedule.

• The Eagles and Cowboys play the same schedule for 12 games.
• They play each other for 2.
• The Eagles got New Orleans and Dallas got Tampa
• The Eagles got Arizona and Dallas got the Rams
• The Eagles got the Steelers and the Cowboys got the Bengals.

That's 1 significantly more difficult game out of 17.

 

3 hours ago, TEW said:

He also was routinely blown up in the run game. Parsons had maybe 2 good plays the whole game — in the third quarter if I remember correctly — and the rest of the game we basically attacked him directly with repeated success.

He was a complete non-factor until Lane went out with a concussion. 

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:

The whole conversation needs context.

Its what the Eagles results are vs those teams. So lose to Bears, beat Dallas, beat New Orleans is the meaning.

I'd rather beat Chicago by 30 and worry about the rest next week.

Thank you

59 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Because a win vs the Bears makes the game vs Cowboys mean less. If Bears win vs Eagles it gives the possibility of Cowboys being #1 seed and Eagles #5 seed by Christmas Day. If Eagles win against an inferior opponent they can afford to lose against a better one. Give me the best path to #1 seed over hypotheticals that may not even matter for draft picks any day. 

I never want a game against the Cowboys to mean less.  That is antithetical to the core principles of the rivalry.  Look at last year.  Was there any less entertaining/satisfying game than the second Cowboys game?  Entertainment needs drama.

1 hour ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

No we don't, Matt. If we lose to the Bears, the Cowboys control their destiny to the top seed. And we're looking at having to win three road playoff games just to get to the Super Bowl. A loss to the Bears would be awful, just awful. 

Furthermore, the Bears winning would probably only help our draft positioning if the Saints lose all four of their remaining games. That's quite unlikely.

That's just a bad, bad notion to have.

That is a "glass empty” approach.  It is also an "oh ye of little faith” approach.  I personally believe this team will take care of business when challenged.

the Saints will indeed lose all their games.  Book it Dan-o.

29 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I never want a game against the Cowboys to mean less.  That is antithetical to the core principles of the rivalry.  Look at last year.  Was there any less entertaining/satisfying game than the second Cowboys game?  Entertainment needs drama.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Agreed.  It is like choosing to watch a documentary rather than a drama.

This is a first for me. Seeing someone hope their team loses a meaningful game for draft purposes. 
 

Is Justin Field's running going to be a problem for us?

12 minutes ago, rrfierce said:

Is Justin Field's running going to be a problem for us?

Potentially, but we should be able to take care of business fairly easily. 

5 hours ago, mattwill said:

Why?  Even if the Cowboys and Vikings win their games, the Eagles have a one game lead on both, plus a tie breaker with the Vikings.  Eagles win on Christmas Eve and their #1 seed is locked up.  Sunday’s Bears game is actually nearly irrelevant vis-a-vis the #1 seed.

 

4 hours ago, mattwill said:

That is a "glass empty” approach.  It is also an "oh ye of little faith” approach.  I personally believe this team will take care of business when challenged.

the Saints will indeed lose all their games.  Book it Dan-o.

Then they should take care of business when NOT challenged.  You can't seriously be talking about hoping for an Eagles Loss in order to potentially benefit the draft pick owned from the Saints.   

It is neither a 'glass empty' approach, nor a 'ye of little faith' approach.  It is a 'take care of your own business, and let the rest take care of itself' approach.  Eagles need to win, because the Eagles haven't secured the division or #1 seed yet.  And there are no guarantees in the NFL.  

Rooting for wins by the bottom of the league to benefit the Eagles draft pick makes sense, but not when you start talking about the Eagles weakening their own position in the playoff standings at the same time.  Foolishness.

 

I love the draft, but winning games > draft picks (as long as you're a contender). 

Howie tanking the 2020 Washington remains an all-time great decision. Still can't believe Washington tried to blow that game by playing Alex Smith.

@LeanMeanGM

Eagles 38

Bears 9

Josh Sweat 2 sacks and AJ Brown 100+ receiving yards

 

Given we are far from tank mode, the only concession I would make towards our draft interests is making a max effort to beat NO even if the 1 seed is wrapped up. This is also because a 3 week bye might cause rust issues. Sure this has already been said…

3 hours ago, EagleJoe8 said:

This is a first for me. Seeing someone hope their team loses a meaningful game for draft purposes. 
 

new to TATE ? this place is full of geniuses. 

 

oh and the artist. cant forget the artist. 

44 minutes ago, Waiting4Someday said:

Given we are far from tank mode, the only concession I would make towards our draft interests is making a max effort to beat NO even if the 1 seed is wrapped up. This is also because a 3 week bye might cause rust issues. Sure this has already been said…

3 week bye is concerning plus we all want that pick.

I agree that we approach NO as a 4 quarter must win and then lean into a full 2 week bye.

https://www.theringer.com/nfl-draft/2022/12/15/23510194/mock-draft-texans-colts-panthers-bryce-young-cj-stroud-will-levis

2 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

https://www.theringer.com/nfl-draft/2022/12/15/23510194/mock-draft-texans-colts-panthers-bryce-young-cj-stroud-will-levis

Murphy wouldn't be my preference, but there's a ton of upside and he's only 20, I believe.

The Saints' pick is likely top 10, barring a 3-1/4-0 run. 6-10 would mean 11th is really worst-case scenario and that requires all the current 5-8 teams to lose.

Lots of Good options

1. Anderson
2. Carter
3. Murphy
4. Wilson
5. Gonzalez
6. Skoronski
7. Smith
8. Porter Jr.

There's also the possibility of 3-4 QBs going top 10. We're in a good spot!

9 hours ago, D-Shiznit said:

Feature on Lurie's ownership.

This was an excellent watch. Lurie is one of the best owners in the NFL.

While it was a bit bumpy at the beginning of his ownership, he has turned out to be the best thing to happen for the Eagles and the fans.

7 minutes ago, RLC said:

The Saints' pick is likely top 10, barring a 3-1/4-0 run. 6-10 would mean 11th is really worst-case scenario and that requires all the current 5-8 teams to lose.

Lots of Good options

1. Anderson
2. Carter
3. Murphy
4. Wilson
5. Gonzalez
6. Skoronski
7. Smith
8. Porter Jr.

There's also the possibility of 3-4 QBs going top 10. We're in a good spot!

QBs who are considered worth first round picks this early always climb the board in Jan-Mar.

 

Carson Wentz, Trey Lance, Josh Allen, Ryan Tannehill, Justin Herbert, most didn’t see them going as high as they did until the predraft stuff picked up.

So many teams look to be drafting QBs next year. I’d be shocked if less than 3 go top 10. Could be more. Just a matter of if those teams trade up ahead of us to snag them

Mailata's comment about Parsons was F'ing gold. That guy is just an incredibly awesome dude. F'ing love him.

13 minutes ago, Swoop said:

Murphy wouldn't be my preference, but there's a ton of upside and he's only 20, I believe.

I’ll give credit to the Colts and the Panthers for standing in the pocket and waiting for Levis and Stroud to fall to their picks… with the phones disconnected Murphy is a fine pick.

No politics