2 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

 

 

 

Hurts has 47 more attempts than Josh Allen. Josh Allen runs a lot and unlike Hurts, Josh Allen has no idea how to protect his body and he will seek out contact most of the time whereas Hurts does an excellent job for the most part of sliding or getting out of bounds. 

 

Not the same team as the Ravens and not the same player as Lamar.  Hurts already has over 300 more passing yards than Lamar did that season in one less game played. 

 

Spoiler alert: Eagles are going deep in the playoffs and Eagles will be signing Hurts to a new deal prior to the start of the next season. 

Not for nothing, but Allen runs too much as well. And unsurprisingly, he’s been banged up and playing hurt. Lamar has now missed games. Murray, another high volume runner is out for the year. Hurts now reportedly dinged up. 
 

1 hour ago, Iggles_Phan said:

He didn't fumble until the second half, after they ignored him the entire first half.   And it was literally his first fumble all year.  If Miles was in the doghouse for that, then shame on everyone responsible for that.  Hurts, Goedert, Brown, Smith, Watkins... all have fumbles too.  Did they go into the doghouse?  

 

And my point continues to be that they didn't NEED to run the RO so much.  Just let the big boys eat and move bodies.  They want to put 8 in the box.... put in a 6th OL at TE and play some smashmouth football.  In the cold and wind, sometimes you have to do just that, and I'd prefer NOT to use my QB to be that battering ram.  Of course, I've been beating that drum for a while and the coaches don't seem to care.  Sirianni even said the game plan included gashing the Bears with Jalen's legs.  Which just makes me sad to hear.

Problem is Sanders is not a smash mouth RB, a couple plays he bounced it for no gain when he could have just dived forward for 3 yards.

Smashmouth running requires that mentality (and strength) from a RB, which is why I wanted them to get a 220 lb back who runs 4.6 but gets those 3-4 yard gains on a consistent basis.

That's the one thing this team lacks, and it could kill them in a bad weather game - Hurts can do it but it's crazy to use him in that fashion.

1 minute ago, TorontoEagle said:

Not for nothing, but Allen runs too much as well. And unsurprisingly, he’s been banged up and playing hurt. Lamar has now missed games. Murray, another high volume runner is out for the year. Hurts now reportedly dinged up. 
 

You'd almost conclude that carrying the ball and getting hit adds up to a greater chance of injury .... or something

11 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

Just some thoughts on the importance of this week.

 

The Eagles need to WIN only one more game out of the next 3 in order to be the #1 seed and get the bye. Thats almost a foregone conclusion at this time.  

However-  This Sat night game- while huge for the fans, means very little in the grand scheme of things. Yes I always want to beat the cowboys, and yes to clinch it by beating them on Christmas eve in their house would be a great Christmas gift, but if they lose this game,  it's almost meaningless. We are likely to see them in the playoffs and it's extremely hard to beat the same team 3 times in one year anyway. Again it's HUGE for the fans... I get that. ANd securing the bye would also be pretty huge, but we are getting that anyway. 

And to be honest, I'd rather we WIN over the saints to help our draft pick, because I know we are getting the 1st rd bye anyway, what matters more is to WIN IN THE PLAYOFFS at this point. 

 

Agreed.  I pointed out the same thing last night.  If the Eagles win, I'll be happy.   If the Eagles lose... I'll sleep just fine.  The Eagles will beat the Saints the following week, but there's no way the Cowboys or Vikings win out.  The Eagles virtually have the #1 seed locked up already.    But, I prefer a loss to the Cowboys, playing starters against the Saints and then going with the backups for the Giants game before the bye and the playoffs.   I really don't want a win against the Cowboys if it means sitting the starters for the next month... which I think the team would do if they clinch on Saturday.

1 minute ago, austinfan said:

Problem is Sanders is not a smash mouth RB, a couple plays he bounced it for no gain when he could have just dived forward for 3 yards.

Smashmouth running requires that mentality (and strength) from a RB, which is why I wanted them to get a 220 lb back who runs 4.6 but gets those 3-4 yard gains on a consistent basis.

That's the one thing this team lacks, and it could kill them in a bad weather game - Hurts can do it but it's crazy to use him in that fashion.

Last year... I'd agree with you.  This year he's been much more disciplined about 'getting what's there' and not bouncing.   But, yes, this team needs and needed a bigger back.  Hurts should not be that guy.  

3 hours ago, TorontoEagle said:

As a fan of the Eagles team, I’m worried they’ll hand out a big contract to him, which they’ll regret when he breaks down like an overused RB. 
 

It looks like it’s gonna be a fun ride until that happens, but sticking your head in the sand over future concerns is what a child does

Except Hurts is among the league leaders in passing from the pocket. Maybe if he breaks down they'll focus more on the passing game.

The one thing they have to throw out of the playbook are the end around with Watkins, kid has speed, but no power or shake & bake, too easy to arm tackle.

The only one suited for that play is Brown, who runs iike a RB, or line Scott out wide.

6 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Not for nothing, but Allen runs too much as well. And unsurprisingly, he’s been banged up and playing hurt. Lamar has now missed games. Murray, another high volume runner is out for the year. Hurts now reportedly dinged up. 
 

 

4 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

You'd almost conclude that carrying the ball and getting hit adds up to a greater chance of injury .... or something

 

Hurts took a beating against a team that is last in the NFL in sacks, knock downs and pressures.  He should not have even had to have his jersey washed after the game, instead he took a ton of unnecessary hits, and you could see the impact of them as the game went on.

Just now, austinfan said:

Except Hurts is among the league leaders in passing from the pocket. Maybe if he breaks down they'll focus more on the passing game.

The one thing they have to throw out of the playbook are the end around with Watkins, kid has speed, but no power or shake & bake, too easy to arm tackle.

The only one suited for that play is Brown, who runs iike a RB, or line Scott out wide.

Why wait?  

Just now, austinfan said:

Except Hurts is among the league leaders in passing from the pocket. Maybe if he breaks down they'll focus more on the passing game.

The one thing they have to throw out of the playbook are the end around with Watkins, kid has speed, but no power or shake & bake, too easy to arm tackle.

The only one suited for that play is Brown, who runs iike a RB, or line Scott out wide.

Yes and a few pages back I suggested he focus on remaining there and continuing to play well from the pocket. Be a point guard, distribute, don’t be the battering ram he was yesterday

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Agreed.  I pointed out the same thing last night.  If the Eagles win, I'll be happy.   If the Eagles lose... I'll sleep just fine.  The Eagles will beat the Saints the following week, but there's no way the Cowboys or Vikings win out.  The Eagles virtually have the #1 seed locked up already.    But, I prefer a loss to the Cowboys, playing starters against the Saints and then going with the backups for the Giants game before the bye and the playoffs.   I really don't want a win against the Cowboys if it means sitting the starters for the next month... which I think the team would do if they clinch on Saturday.

You, Sir, should take a seat at the back of the Bus.

It's about to be hit by a Sh!tstorm of Eagles and those seats will be obliterated, along with that mentality.

Please wear your mask til then so as not to infect others with that crap virus you have...

TYVMuch. 

3 minutes ago, downundermike said:

 

 

Hurts took a beating against a team that is last in the NFL in sacks, knock downs and pressures.  He should not have even had to have his jersey washed after the game, instead he took a ton of unnecessary hits, and you could see the impact of them as the game went on.

Some of those were play calling and some were on Hurts. He has done a good job all year avoiding unnecessary hits but yesterday he was running right into them

Honest question how many Wr screens have we run with brown and just carries like with Quez? With his physicality and strength feels like it would be way more effective then running them with quez 

6 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Agreed.  I pointed out the same thing last night.  If the Eagles win, I'll be happy.   If the Eagles lose... I'll sleep just fine.  The Eagles will beat the Saints the following week, but there's no way the Cowboys or Vikings win out.  The Eagles virtually have the #1 seed locked up already.    But, I prefer a loss to the Cowboys, playing starters against the Saints and then going with the backups for the Giants game before the bye and the playoffs.   I really don't want a win against the Cowboys if it means sitting the starters for the next month... which I think the team would do if they clinch on Saturday.

Last year... I'd agree with you.  This year he's been much more disciplined about 'getting what's there' and not bouncing.   But, yes, this team needs and needed a bigger back.  Hurts should not be that guy.  

100% this. I am ok with killing the Boys and Saints, and pulling the starters late in 3rd qtr of the Saints game . I would still play the starters a qtr vs the Giants as well. But that not likely how SIri would do it.  We will see. 

 

I would be stunned if we did this, but you could argue we should bench our starters Saturday, to give them more rest. 

This thread does a good job explaining the probability behind it.

6 minutes ago, Doc S. said:

You, Sir, should take a seat at the back of the Bus.

It's about to be hit by a Sh!tstorm of Eagles and those seats will be obliterated, along with that mentality.

Please wear your mask til then so as not to infect others with that crap virus you have...

TYVMuch. 

I knew that would draw this kind of response.  But context is everything.   If it means sitting the starters for a month... then yes, I don't want a win this Saturday.  And I fear this organization will sit their starters for a month if they clinch.    I think that leads to a flat team for the playoffs, against a team that had to play tough down the stretch and this team may not be able to shake the cobwebs fast enough if they dig a 14 point hole early like they did with the Jags.

 

Of course... if I were in charge, I'd say we should win Saturday, then I play my starters for at least a full half, probably more than that against the Saints... and then sit my starters against the Giants.  But, I don't see this organization suiting players up for the Saints game if they win Saturday.

1 minute ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Honest question how many Wr screens have we run with brown and just carries like with Quez? With his physicality and strength feels like it would be way more effective then running them with quez 

The wr screen to Smith to pickup the first down was nicely executed. Use Watkins speed downfield or on a run. Hated those calls

3 minutes ago, RLC said:

I would be stunned if we did this, but you could argue we should bench our starters Saturday, to give them more rest. 

This thread does a good job explaining the probability behind it.

I would have zero problem if Siri did it this way.   Would even be funnier if we did rest the starters and still won the game. LOL

1 minute ago, RLC said:

I would be stunned if we did this, but you could argue we should bench our starters Saturday, to give them more rest. 

This thread does a good job explaining the probability behind it.

That would be unprecedented, but there is sound logic to it.

1 minute ago, Godfather said:

Some of those were play calling and some were on Hurts. He has done a good job all year avoiding unnecessary hits but yesterday he was running right into them

It was an issue on both yesterday. Hurts shouldn’t have taken the beating he did in that game against a bears defense that’s 29th dvoa against the run and 31st in dvoa against the pass. Also think the bears coming off a a bye week looked fresh and extra week to prepare probably helped their defense. 

that said i don’t think it was a stellar performance by the oline. I tend to think some of the guys might have taken Chicago lightly and looking forward to Dallas week. 

Wonder if he'll go back to the Chiefs

Just now, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

It was an issue on both yesterday. Hurts shouldn’t have taken the beating he did in that game against a bears defense that’s 29th dvoa against the run and 31st in dvoa against the pass. Also think the bears coming off a a bye week looked fresh and extra week to prepare probably helped their defense. 

that said i don’t think it was a stellar performance by the oline. I tend to think some of the guys might have taken Chicago lightly and looking forward to Dallas week. 

Oline did a great job yesterday. I don't think they're getting enough credit this morning

4 minutes ago, RLC said:

I would be stunned if we did this, but you could argue we should bench our starters Saturday, to give them more rest. 

This thread does a good job explaining the probability behind it.

 

 

Wouldn't be a bad idea on several fronts.  Biggest being gives the starters rest instead of playing on a short week and then also removes the scenario that is difficult of having to beat the same team 3 times in a season. Barring Lions making the playoffs and pulling off a round one upset we are most definitely playing the Cowboys in the divisional round. 

2 minutes ago, Godfather said:

The wr screen to Smith to pickup the first down was nicely executed. Use Watkins speed downfield or on a run. Hated those calls

I don’t mind them with smith. He is usually pretty physical even as he isn’t physically built as brown. The issue is Quez offers little in terms of breaking tackles. So your blocking better be good cause he’s not breaking tackles 

19 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Not for nothing, but Allen runs too much as well. And unsurprisingly, he’s been banged up and playing hurt. Lamar has now missed games. Murray, another high volume runner is out for the year. Hurts now reportedly dinged up. 
 

I've seen you mention this a couple times now - where did you see it?  I can't find anything on it

5 minutes ago, Godfather said:

Oline did a great job yesterday. I don't think they're getting enough credit this morning

I thought they were ok. I don’t think they were close to the level you saw against the titans in pass blocking considering the level of talent. And the week prior in run blocking. Some of that i attribute to lack of runs early by our backs so we never got into a good rhythm. I thought they did get better as the game wore on. 

24 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

This is the style that works great for colleges, because they can only have a guy for 4 years (5 if you count the red shirt) and they have the opportunity to go out and recruit the next great QB to fill the hole left behind.    The NFL isn't like that.  So, I guess the plan might be to run Hurts into the ground and move on when he gets expensive.  You keep the ancillary pieces in place and maybe a few extra pieces because you have a cheap QB.    But, that's a dangerous game to play.   Will the right guy be available when you are searching?  Will you be in as position to grab him?  How will the team respond to the new guy after they'd bonded with the old guy.  Lots and lots of variables.

I don't think there's a plan to run him into the ground.  The question is how effective can he be if he gets hurt running the ball because he will get hurt at some point or his athleticism will wear down.  I think there's a fair comparison between Hurts and McNabb and Cam Newton.  Each of those QBs ultimately lost efficacy because of age and injuries.  I don't think either just had about 4 seasons of good play.  

Newton played as a passable to very good starting QB until his shoulder got destroyed.  Where he falls short of Hurts, is protecting the football.  He never had under 10 ints in a season.  He put up good yards but his best passing season probably was his first.  He never really progressed as a passer and made the same mistakes in the passing game that he made as a rookie. His lack of leadership is one reason the Panthers moved on from Steve Smith.  Despite that if you just look at his productivity, Newton still had 8 seasons as a starting productive QB.  His career went off the rails at 29 and it was mostly due to some repeated shoulder injuries.  The most notable occurred in 2018 on a hit by TJ Watt when Cam was standing in the pocket.  His arm was not the same after that injury.  So while you can argue the plan is to wear him out and move on I still don't think that means his shelflife is necessarily only the next 3 seasons.  

Similarly, McNabb played until he was 33.  He still was a mobile QB until he retired although he did not run the ball.  He also only ever made limited progress as a passer.  He always struggled with accuracy.  Those struggles ultimately made him less and less of a average QB as the League moved towards more efficient passing offenses.  He did struggle to rebound after injuries but played at a fairly high level for 10 seasons.  I don't think injuries are what derailed McNabb or limited him.  He just stopped having any upside and was not effective unless he played with elite talent on the o-line and at receiver. 

I am not sure that the FO has any forthought on whether Hurts will need to run the ball like he is now in order for the offense to work.  My sense is that the FO will evaluate him like they have evaluated the position in the past.   They are going to keep talent at the position unless they think there is a clear upgrade or need to upgrade.  They will pay Hurts a top of the market type deal to keep him.   Hurts probably will not be run into the ground before age 30+ barring a significant injury.  Even if he does get injured, unless it's to his throwing arm, he's likely to retain his mobility and effectiveness as a passer. Hurts isn't going to get the deal that Mahomes got in terms of length but it will likely be a 5 year type deal.