2 hours ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I’d have to go watch the replay of that. Felt like they ran a drag route across the field with him. Then again it was the far side of the field from where i was. 

play I’m talking about looks more like a go in motion drag. slant I want is brown runs a yard and a half vertical and slants going into the end zone. not running him across the field where he’s running horizontally across at the 4

 

Ugh... watching that again, it's even worse.   Looks like maybe Hurts wasn't supposed to move to his right... and held the ball way longer than he was supposed to, such that Watkins, Brown and Goedert were all in the same area.   Brown at the 4, Watkins 1 yard deep in the end zone, and Goedert is in the front corner, also about a yard or two deep.   Just a horrific play design or horrific execution... or both.  

13 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

You can certainly make a case for doing it, but the Saints pick gives optionality. I don't think this will happen, but what if Hurts regresses and has a terrible 2nd half to the season and Howie needs to rethink their QB plans. If you give up the Saints pick, you can kiss that goodbye.

But potentially you could get say Will Anderson and sign Bradley Chubb with what you'd be giving for Burns. I used the two most ideal scenarios, so a lot would have to go right for the Eagles to get both of them, but it is possible. Once you trade that Saints pick for Burns, those possibilities are gone. You're locked into Burns. He's very good, but I love having options.

Not to beat a dead horse, but it's about stacking games.  Weeks 2&3 were exceptional.  Weeks 1+5...he helped "gut out" wins with his legs, but that level of passing was not good.

If the 1+5 column stacks up and looks like the norm, then that's enough for me to say it's time to rethink the QB plans.  If the 2+3 column are going to be the norm (it doesn't have to be like that EVERY week, but that's got to become close to the expectation), then the QB situation is all squared away.

 

10 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

Another thing that's been bothering me. The Eagles do it a lot but I see other teams doing it too. And that is pushing the pile forward. It's illegal to help the runner. It's against the rules. Heck, Goedert even blatantly pulled Hurts in on the first touchdown run.

It's not being called and I guess it's not going to be called this season so everyone is now putting a guy right behind the quarterback on sneaks and having him drive from behind.

There's just something about it that I find distasteful as a football fan.

I agree, this is a new and seemingly accepted practice now. Grab the QB and drag him over the Goal, Three guys pushing from behind on a keeper, etc. Thought the rule was clear but not seeing it being called.

The Rule?

Assisted forward Progress?, need to look around for the actual terms..

2 hours ago, Bacarty2 said:

 

But thats not a Indigenous vs White man thing. Thats a It's happened to every one, in every century, in every aspect of life thing. 

I think thats one thing I've never really grasped. Locals (in this case indians) get dominated but the new big bad wolf for important land

Scramble for Africa comes to mind. 

Ever see how small the ottoman empire started?

Yes, the discussion is turning on how and by whom History is written, then accepted as fact.

No lack of examples, more about who writes the final narrative.

Acting like Daniel Jones and Cooper Rush are franchise QBs is an interesting take. Wentz isn't the only problem there Ron.  

9 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Ugh... watching that again, it's even worse.   Looks like maybe Hurts wasn't supposed to move to his right... and held the ball way longer than he was supposed to, such that Watkins, Brown and Goedert were all in the same area.   Brown at the 4, Watkins 1 yard deep in the end zone, and Goedert is in the front corner, also about a yard or two deep.   Just a horrific play design or horrific execution... or both.  

Yeah. It’s why i said I’d have done a quick slant and get it out almost immediately after it was snapped. Corner was one on one on an island to start. Playing back 5-6 yards off. No way he makes up that type of ground to pick it and he’d have to make a hell of a play to knock it down. Likelihood brown catches. He may or may not score the td but with the catch it would force the cards to burn a timeout. We got fortunate the rule is what the rule is and the cardinals had to burn one anyway. They really need to utilize the size, strength and physicality of brown in the red zone. 

1 hour ago, NCiggles said:

I am not sure why Hurts threw it to Watkins.  It seems like the better choice would have been Brown.  I am guessing the route concept had something to do with the Eagles expecting pressure and Hurts having to move away from it.  So it gave him 3 targets on one side.  I am not a big fan of the play call but maybe they score if Hurts gets it to Brown instead of Watkins.  It's not like he would have walked in with it but I think he would have been difficult for them to stop.  There's no real explanation for throwing it to Watkins unless he didn't think the DB covering Goedert was in zone.  It was a bad decision by Hurts to make that throw more than a bad play call.  

That's what he's here for... Give it to him on the 4, and let him run over someone into the end zone.  That was the best option given that play.   Throwing the ball to Watkins in traffic (unlike throwing it to Brown in traffic, or even Smith) is just not a good plan.  That's not his forte.

1 minute ago, DEagle7 said:

Acting like Daniel Jones and Cooper Rush are franchise QBs is an interesting take. Wentz isn't the only problem there Ron.  

Wentz has not been very good for them. But their offensive line is horrible. The fact they let scherff go was completely idiotic imo 

 

 

3 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Acting like Daniel Jones and Cooper Rush are franchise QBs is an interesting take. Wentz isn't the only problem there Ron.  

Wouldn't be surprised at all if Rivera gets fired this year. 

 

24 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

Another thing that's been bothering me. The Eagles do it a lot but I see other teams doing it too. And that is pushing the pile forward. It's illegal to help the runner. It's against the rules. Heck, Goedert even blatantly pulled Hurts in on the first touchdown run.

It's not being called and I guess it's not going to be called this season so everyone is now putting a guy right behind the quarterback on sneaks and having him drive from behind.

There's just something about it that I find distasteful as a football fan.

I felt the exact same way.  It seems like it's cheating or cheapening the actual pay.  I would be furious if the Cowboys just used Zeke to push Cooper Rush forward.

2 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Wentz has not been very good for them. But their offensive line is horrible. The fact they let scherff go was completely idiotic imo 

Agreed.  I'd argue Wentz has been even worse than his numbers suggest, but their OL, offensive play calling and entire defense have been awful too.  The difference in play between Wentz and Daniel Jones is not the major reason there's a 3 game difference in their record.  Dumb for a coach to throw 1 player under the bus like that. Even a bad player.

1 hour ago, schuy7 said:

Fine. I'll say it. I think we lose to the Cowboys.

 

 

 

 

But, we never speak such things.    

Imagine firing everyone but keeping McAdoo around. 

14 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Yeah. It’s why i said I’d have done a quick slant and get it out almost immediately after it was snapped. Corner was one on one on an island to start. Playing back 5-6 yards off. No way he makes up that type of ground to pick it and he’d have to make a hell of a play to knock it down. Likelihood brown catches. He may or may not score the td but with the catch it would force the cards to burn a timeout. We got fortunate the rule is what the rule is and the cardinals had to burn one anyway. They really need to utilize the size, strength and physicality of brown in the red zone. 

Seems the only physicality they really want to utilize in the red zone is Hurts.  

7 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

Yes, I have read that along with 1491 and a fair amount of other books. Including people writing on Columbus.  I agree that displacement and war is all a part of human history.  Arguably the conquest of the Americas was only possible because of the native population having a lack of immunity for European diseases.  Historians make the point that disease spread faster and killed more people in the Americas than Europeans. We don't have to view natives as some morally uncorruptible people to acknowledge their cultures were destroyed by European colonization. At the same time, we don't have laude the acheivements of Columbus when they are wrapped in so many negative consequences for many people.  

 

 

Don’t disagree.  I don’t look at history with rose colored glasses.  In argument, the initial celebration of Columbus Day in the US was the same rose colored glasses approach to our history as many of our historic celebrations were.  But those early attempts failed.  It wasn’t until larger cities with high Italian American populations adopted the celebration that it took off.  Because at the time of such, the Italian states had formed into first the Kingdom of Italy and then the country, the distinction of his Genoa heritage was not made.  

As far a voyaging to the Americas, Columbus was a latecomer.  It is possible the Phonecians were here first.  Strong suggestion the Chinese were too.  The Polynesians certainly were.  The people of the North were aware of each other.  The Vikings were here long before Columbus.  Heck, most people don’t know it but half of Iceland and all of Greenland are on the North American plate.  There is a strong suggestion that the Irish were fishing the Grand Banks for a couple centuries (circa 1300s) before the other Europeans  Quite possible the Danes and Norse as well (back then no real distinction between the Danes and the Norse).

 

 

4 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Acting like Daniel Jones and Cooper Rush are franchise QBs is an interesting take. Wentz isn't the only problem there Ron.  

Think I've heard that before somewhere else......and somewhere else before that.

15 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Acting like Daniel Jones and Cooper Rush are franchise QBs is an interesting take. Wentz isn't the only problem there Ron.  

 

Everywhere Wentz goes people within the organization have an issue with him.  Can't be Wentz as the issue though in these situations. 

13 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Wouldn't be surprised at all if Rivera gets fired this year. 

Riverboat Ron shouldn’t complain when a longshot doesn’t payoff.

6 minutes ago, 315Eagles said:

Think I've heard that before somewhere else......and somewhere else before that.

Wentz is a major problem for them. And was for us. And the Colts. He wasn't the only problem for any of those teams. Especially the Commanders who have major problems pretty much everywhere.

Wentz does seem particularly good at lighting the fuse on crappy situations though I'll give you that. 

27 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Ugh... watching that again, it's even worse.   Looks like maybe Hurts wasn't supposed to move to his right... and held the ball way longer than he was supposed to, such that Watkins, Brown and Goedert were all in the same area.   Brown at the 4, Watkins 1 yard deep in the end zone, and Goedert is in the front corner, also about a yard or two deep.   Just a horrific play design or horrific execution... or both.  

Hurts needed to sit in the pocket and deliver the ball to Brown instead of freaking out over a blitz. That would have made the play design look much better. 

22 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Acting like Daniel Jones and Cooper Rush are franchise QBs is an interesting take. Wentz isn't the only problem there Ron.  

Sure makes me wonder if Wentz took his not listening attitude to Indy and now on to DC.  That interception was awful yesterday.  Pure hero ball. 

23 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

That's what he's here for... Give it to him on the 4, and let him run over someone into the end zone.  That was the best option given that play.   Throwing the ball to Watkins in traffic (unlike throwing it to Brown in traffic, or even Smith) is just not a good plan.  That's not his forte.

Nothing planned about the end result of that play. But he hit Watkins where only he could and probably should have caught the ball.