1 minute ago, mattwill said:

Speaking of Philly Special ... did I see one successfully executed in one of the games yesterday? 

Jets

12 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Shouldn't it be a service mark?

Not in my neck of the woods, guy

Hoping for some good Mailata news. 

2 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Speaking of Philly Special ... did I see one successfully executed in one of the games yesterday? 

C'mon man, re-read that post you quoted....it's all right there!

Eagles currently a top-3 defense after 4 games? I had high hopes and was eager to see how they looked with the new additions, but definitely didn't expect that at all.

First on my list to sign to an extension.

 

Just now, 4for4EaglesNest said:

I think he'll be fine, long term.  I doubt they would be having him work on the sidelines if it was serious.  

Would think he's out through the bye worst case

2 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

Would think he's out through the bye worst case

They need him or Dillard vs the Boys.  If you neutralize their pass rush, there is nothing else that scares you on that team.

20 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

I haven't watched the game yet, so all I have to go on are my impressions while watching the game live in person. I was disappointed that he let the ball hit the ground so often. He was either afraid to field a wet ball in a downpour (understandable) or he was told to avoid doing so (possible but I'm not sure). I also thought he made an idiotic decision to return a kickoff from inside the endzone instead of taking the ball out at the 25 on a touchback. Overall, not a good day for him. But as I said last night, it's foolish to try to evaluate that game through the lens we normally view a game. It was NOT a normal game. Just be happy with the end result and move on.

Speaking of lenses, my binoculars, which I use about 98% of the time during an Eagles game, were useless yesterday. Everything fogged up. I tried for about a quarter to look through the fog but I realized it was never going to work so I put them in my bag under the seat. It was miserable trying to watch action 100 yards away with the naked eye. That only added to the bad mood I was in throughout the day. Fortunately we won so that brightened things considerably. But overall it was a lousy, lousy day.

But you hung in there anyway, 

1 hour ago, Bacarty2 said:

def of an ugly win. 

You gave up a pick 6, you had 5 take aways and only won by 1 score. The weather was brutal. You had 5 take aways and only scored 30. I think the Lions game was an ugly win too

I agree the Lions game was an ugly win; however, I saw yesterday's game as a high character win.

7 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

First on my list to sign to an extension.

 

He's absolute garbage in run support, but he more than makes up for it where it counts.

1 minute ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

First on my list to sign to an extension.

 

 

Bradberry will probably be looking for a pretty big payday (north of $15 million a year), so an extension right now would be a minimum of $45 million over three years.

CGJ will be looking for similar money. I don't know if they can afford both guys.

15 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

One less issue...

Over the past three weeks, we are in the top-ten in fewest penalties per game (5.3).

That's significant. Progress with O lineman downfield...etc.

1 minute ago, we_gotta_believe said:

He's absolute garbage in run support, but he more than makes up for it where it counts.

Maybe.

But I can image that there are a handful of sacks that can be attributed to him by taking away the QB's first read.

19 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

One less issue...

Over the past three weeks, we are in the top-ten in fewest penalties per game (5.3).

When did Barnett get injured again?

1 minute ago, jsb235 said:

Bradberry will probably be looking for a pretty big payday (north of $15 million a year), so an extension right now would be a minimum of $45 million over three years.

CGJ will be looking for similar money. I don't know if they can afford both guys.

IMO, Bradberry is more critical to the effectiveness of this scheme.  Our four-man rush gets home because the QB needs to move off his first read.  That was what Gannon said after the WAS game and I suspect he did the same against Trevor.

I like the skill set that CGJ offers, but would rather go big at CB and be adequate at safety.

2 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Maybe.

But I can image that there are a handful of sacks that can be attributed to him by taking away the QB's first read.

Yeah that's what I mean, his contributions to the defense are easily a net positive. I'm not sure there's been anyone consistently worse in run support on our defense than him, but I'm more than willing to not nit pick to much on that given how well he's played otherwise.

13 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I keep up with the hip lingo the kids are using... It's how I stay relevant to my students.

I bet you even have some memes in your classwork.  

2 hours ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

I've obviously been pretty doubtful of Hurts, but yesterday was one of the more encouraging games I have seen from him. He had the really bad decision and throw that his BFF quit on, but how the team rallied and came back is a testament to him and the other leaders.  He has steely reserve.  Ugly wins are wins and any win is a good win.  But he faced adversity yesterday and worked through it.  

 

 

And he didnt do it by running the ball himself. Which is often how a struggling offense with a running RB starts making plays.

The run game with RBs got going. And he threw when the situation called for it. Some drives ended with less points due to his receivers not making the plays (Goedert and Brown). Not because of Hurts not making throws. He was totally fine. 

 

 

35 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Started by giving up a pick 6.  It was a PBU by the defense, nothing ugly about that.  Good hard nosed football.  The PBU ricochet then was up for grabs.  Nothing ugly about that.  It happens all the time.  Then they gave up a 14-0 deficit What about that was ugly. Jacksonville executed..  The Eagles defense had a broken pass coverage (bad) and a forced fumble (good).  All in all it was a reasonably typical NFL drive. The and were in danger of falling behind 21-0... until the unforced error by Lawrence dropping the ball while rolling to his right on a 4th down. You minimize the fact that the final play of that drive was a 4th down, and the drive had produced only 26 yards for Jacksonville. It was a good (but not perfect) defensive effort.  Nothing ugly about it.  Good hard-nosed football.   The game really turned on that play.  From that point on, the Eagles controlled the game.  It was a game that didn't include much in the way of deep passing and it was a game with a lot of turnovers - fortunately, the vast majority on the part of Jax.  But, it definitely wasn't a 'pretty' win. Agreed.  Does that make it "ugly"?

And there was a PAT that was right on target that took a hard right turn and was pushed past the upright at one point What was "ugly" about that?... and it seemed that both teams were unwilling to try a FG of any significant distance. Again, was that "ugly" or simply a game being played in the elements?  As a point of comparison was the Shady McCoy game in the snow against Detroit "ugly" because of the weather conditions?

Hurts stared down his receiver and threw the ball late.   It was ugly.  The effort by Brown, if you can call it that... was ugly.

 

Ugly from the perspective of an Eagles fan to fall down 14-0... at home.  That's always ugly.  And the boo birds would have been out, had they not been drenched.

 

I didn't minimize anything about that drive by Jacksonville.  They were in FG range on a normal day... 34 yard line is a 51 yard FG, which is routine in today's NFL.  And the reason they had such a short drive and ended up in FG range, is that the Eagles' O turned the ball over on downs at the Jax 40 (borderline too long for a FG try these days... but definitely out of the question in that weather, another uptick for 'ugly').  It was 4th down... without the fumble it sure looked like they were going to convert it and keep driving.  And again... there was nothing great about the effort that really forced that fumble.  The ball was wet and just slipped out of Lawrence's hand.  Hence the unforced part.

 

The Eagles didn't fall behind by 14 against the Lions in the snow... and they didn't barely hang on to a 1 possession win.  They blew out the Lions by the end of it.   Totally different.  Ugly start to that game for sure.  Then the Eagles figured out how to play through it, and the Lions never did.   It was ugly... for the Lions.  Not for the Eagles though.

 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

We had one punt on a short field that Agnew fielded at about the 10 and returned it to the 20. It’s not just touchbacks.

No sheet. Coverage has been an issue for a couple years. 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

Two chances to pin them deep twice and failed. I think that’s bad.

How would you suggest the punter adjust what he did in order to accomplish the end result you (and I) desire?  The return was a very good play by the Jags player.  The touchback was an unfortunate bounce.  @Iggles_Phan did make the very valid suggestion that Siposs work on coffin corner kicks.  That would eliminate the "bounce factor" as well as the possibilityt of a return. 

So blending the Jordan Davis and Bradberry/CGJ discussions...

Baltimore, featuring Kyle Hamilton at Safety, is now last in the league in pass defense.  By a lot.

 

EDIT:  Per pro-football-reference, he is playing less than half of the defensive snaps.  https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HamiKy00.htm