1 hour ago, EagleJoe8 said:

If he proves worth it, then so be it. I don’t believe Wentz had at the time he got extended. 

It is a valid point. Players typically get extended earlier rather than later. Probably because teams are looking to get a cheaper contract compared to re-signing them the next year. Players are also looking to get long-term security earlier in their careers. Very rarely does a team make that gamble though (Flacco with Ravens is one example). Washington even did that with Cousins to an extent. Maybe more teams should be willing to wait longer and pay more if the player is worth paying. May have more players holding out though because of the lack of long-term security in such a violent sport.

Remember when DJax mailed it in an entire season before his contract year and still got extended?

Wentz had proven that he could play at an elite level for one season. But we paid him before making sure he could do that over multiple seasons. And many players are paid off of one year of production. That is how contract years and free agency drives a lot of contracts. Looking back the Eagles should have waited to extend him. But who really knows. Can only say that now because of what we now know. At the time though he was a player that was likely going to win the MVP had he stayed healthy for that season.

36 minutes ago, Devaster said:

It is a valid point. Players typically get extended earlier rather than later. Probably because teams are looking to get a cheaper contract compared to re-signing them the next year. Players are also looking to get long-term security earlier in their careers. Very rarely does a team make that gamble though (Flacco with Ravens is one example). Washington even did that with Cousins to an extent. Maybe more teams should be willing to wait longer and pay more if the player is worth paying. May have more players holding out though because of the lack of long-term security in such a violent sport.

Remember when DJax mailed it in an entire season before his contract year and still got extended?

Wentz had proven that he could play at an elite level for one season. But we paid him before making sure he could do that over multiple seasons. And many players are paid off of one year of production. That is how contract years and free agency drives a lot of contracts. Looking back the Eagles should have waited to extend him. But who really knows. Can only say that now because of what we now know. At the time though he was a player that was likely going to win the MVP had he stayed healthy for that season.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but at that point in 2019 when Wentz got paid, he had IMO an underwhelming 2018 season that once again ended with him taking no playoff snaps. He had clearly regressed from 2017 in what he did play, but also had a 2nd injury making him un-reliable. I know there is risk in waiting, but with Wentz, I thought they should have taken that risk. I have similar thoughts on Hurts, but moreso because of the general direction of QB contracts these days. I'm not naive to the fact that he likely gets extended, but IMO, I wouldn't do it unless he proves to be a monster in the playoffs.

29 minutes ago, EagleJoe8 said:

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but at that point in 2019 when Wentz got paid, he had IMO an underwhelming 2018 season that once again ended with him taking no playoff snaps. He had clearly regressed from 2017 in what he did play, but also had a 2nd injury making him un-reliable. I know there is risk in waiting, but with Wentz, I thought they should have taken that risk. I have similar thoughts on Hurts, but moreso because of the general direction of QB contracts these days. I'm not naive to the fact that he likely gets extended, but IMO, I wouldn't do it unless he proves to be a monster in the playoffs.

I'm with you there. And I forgot that Wentz had another season before getting extended. But that is the history of this front office and owner. The underwhelming season and his injury finish to the spectacular season in 2017 really should have been some red flags that they should have waited another year.

I'm there with you on Hurts as well. I'd like to see Hurts do well this post-season and have another great season under his belt before they re-sign him. I think next year is his contract year though, so they may extend him this off-season based on how this season goes.

My takeaway from this is to be very cautious when drafting players from smaller colleges/conferences, no matter how good they looked there.

46 minutes ago, Big___Al said:

My takeaway from this is to be very cautious when drafting players from smaller colleges/conferences, no matter how good they looked there.

Al,

That's always been an issue. Typically, when drafting a guy from a small school/program it has to be clear that he overwhelmingly dominated his competition.

My how things have changed. I remember the thread about if Wentz was better than Elliott and Dak combined (well he did help win a SB) and now we are wondering if he was even worth drafting. 

Unless we somehow end up drafting Mahomes the next year, I would still draft Wentz for the butterfly effect relating to SB52. With that said, knowing what we know now, would definitely trade him and give Foles the team after 2017.

Foles likely would have struggled with his play and injuries, but so did Wentz. At least we would have gotten better draft compensation, and avoided the drama and Wentzcuses.

2 hours ago, D-Shiznit said:

Unless we somehow end up drafting Mahomes the next year, I would still draft Wentz for the butterfly effect relating to SB52. With that said, knowing what we know now, would definitely trade him and give Foles the team after 2017.

Foles likely would have struggled with his play and injuries, but so did Wentz. At least we would have gotten better draft compensation, and avoided the drama and Wentzcuses.

Well then we might not be sitting here with Hurts at 10-1 if Wentz had not sucked and brought drama. 

Never understood the point of these kinds of threads, especially with the way everything has played out till today. 

Sure, he helped us get our first SB.  The fact that we moved on after he regressed is even better, a sign of good management.

The only regrettable thing is how many of his fanboys still linger, now attacking our new superior QB out of shame or embarrassment at their Wentz ball-washing.

More glad that they drafted Hurts though. At the time of that pick I thought it was a bad idea to draft a backup quarterback, but the Eagles must’ve seen the writing on the wall and they knew the internal struggles going on about Wentz. I was wrong about that pick. I thought it was a mistake at the time, but clearly it was the right choice.

Both Wentz and Goff should have been late 1st round picks. Almost every year we watch teams overrate QB prospects in the 3 weeks leading up to the draft. Most are such big hit and miss prospects that it doesn't make sense to pick them over a few bona fide blue-chip prospects available at other positions. But teams have this sense of panic and justify the process (of over-drafting QBs)  by suggesting that a franchise QB is worth it. The problem is, most of them don't work out because they are overrated. 

It was funny watching how many 1st rd QB prospects analysts had in last year's draft. 

Imagine being Wentz and watching all the success of your back ups lmao 

On 12/5/2022 at 6:08 AM, brkmsn said:

Both Wentz and Goff should have been late 1st round picks. Almost every year we watch teams overrate QB prospects in the 3 weeks leading up to the draft. Most are such big hit and miss prospects that it doesn't make sense to pick them over a few bona fide blue-chip prospects available at other positions. But teams have this sense of panic and justify the process (of over-drafting QBs)  by suggesting that a franchise QB is worth it. The problem is, most of them don't work out because they are overrated. 

It was funny watching how many 1st rd QB prospects analysts had in last year's draft. 

Based on their current careers they probably aren't deserving of being drafted even at the end of the 1st. QB is a position of need for so many teams though and a position of scarcity. That is the reason QB's that have no business going in the 1st round when there are so many other more talented players that also go or could have gone in the 1st round. Teams miss on other positions as well, but QB is probably one of the biggest bust selections in the 1st round.

Teams are afraid to let a QB pass them because you really can't know for sure whether one will be the next Brady/Mahomes or a Jamarcus Russell/Leaf/Rosen. There are very few can't-miss QB prospects like Luck/Manning (many thought Leaf should have gone before Manning as well). And Luck ended up retiring early. It is probably a gamble worth taking for most teams considering other positions are much more easily replaced and talent found in later rounds.

For sure. Wentz played at such a high level that he helped lock up the number one seed. The team doesn't win the SB without his MVP level of play before he got hurt. Giving him a huge extension on the other hand was a tough choice. On one hand, it's really hard to find a franchise QB. Over half the teams in the NFL are still looking for that guy. So when you find someone you think has the potential to be that guy you have to lock him up, that just how the modern NFL works. That is why aging or mediocre QBs can still get huge contracts, the most important position in sports is hard to fill. But that time, there was probably some concern at how his injury had affected his play and questions about his leadership style in the locker room. Still, I think most GMs and teams would do that contract just because it is such a difficult position to find. I mean honestly, teams still traded for him even after his struggles the past few years. Howie getting rid of him for what he got is a real miracle when looking back at the situation. 

On 12/5/2022 at 3:43 AM, EazyEaglez said:

More glad that they drafted Hurts though. At the time of that pick I thought it was a bad idea to draft a backup quarterback, but the Eagles must’ve seen the writing on the wall and they knew the internal struggles going on about Wentz. I was wrong about that pick. I thought it was a mistake at the time, but clearly it was the right choice.

The funny thing was (and I said it then), IMO Howie had drafted Hurts in the hope the 2020 College Football season would be canceled and he did enough work to show a team would trade at least a first if not more for him.  Of course, Wentz imploded to where Hurts took over and the Eagles have not looked back. 

On 12/5/2022 at 9:08 AM, brkmsn said:

Both Wentz and Goff should have been late 1st round picks. Almost every year we watch teams overrate QB prospects in the 3 weeks leading up to the draft. Most are such big hit and miss prospects that it doesn't make sense to pick them over a few bona fide blue-chip prospects available at other positions. But teams have this sense of panic and justify the process (of over-drafting QBs)  by suggesting that a franchise QB is worth it. The problem is, most of them don't work out because they are overrated. 

It was funny watching how many 1st rd QB prospects analysts had in last year's draft. 

This is spot on. I was listening to Mel Kiper this morning, and he pointed out that drafting a QB in the first few picks generally doesn't work out over the long haul. .  For every Joe Burrow,  there's a Goff or Wentz or Baker Mayfield or even Trevor Lawrence.  Teams over-value quarterbacks because they desperately need a franchise quarterback.  That's why guys like Hurts are unicorns.  

On 12/5/2022 at 9:08 AM, brkmsn said:

Both Wentz and Goff should have been late 1st round picks. Almost every year we watch teams overrate QB prospects in the 3 weeks leading up to the draft. Most are such big hit and miss prospects that it doesn't make sense to pick them over a few bona fide blue-chip prospects available at other positions. But teams have this sense of panic and justify the process (of over-drafting QBs)  by suggesting that a franchise QB is worth it. The problem is, most of them don't work out because they are overrated. 

It was funny watching how many 1st rd QB prospects analysts had in last year's draft. 

Another reason I would have taken Dak in the 3rd round (Cowboys took him in Round 4) and before him Kirk Cousins over Nick Foles in Round 3 for reasons noted upthread.  One or both of them I think could have won for the Eagles.  

2 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

The funny thing was (and I said it then), IMO Howie had drafted Hurts in the hope the 2020 College Football season would be canceled and he did enough work to show a team would trade at least a first if not more for him.  Of course, Wentz imploded to where Hurts took over and the Eagles have not looked back. 

I never really brought into the first for Hurts talk. There was just not enough there for any team to give up that much for him. I will state that Carson’s contract basically had an out after two or three years. Seemed way more likely to me that they would try and flip a 28-29 year old Wentz than a 25-26 year old Hurts. Simply put if Hurts doesn’t play then there no way he garners a 1st round pick. If he does play to a level of a first round pick then how do you trade him? Ultimately I don’t think people were willing to accept this truth. Regardless if Hurts was the heir apparent or not Carson’s days in Philly were numbered the day they drafted Hurts. 

48 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

I never really brought into the first for Hurts talk. There was just not enough there for any team to give up that much for him. I will state that Carson’s contract basically had an out after two or three years. Seemed way more likely to me that they would try and flip a 28-29 year old Wentz than a 25-26 year old Hurts. 

Oh I definitely think that is what Howie was thinking:

At the time Hurts was taken, it was looking like the 2020 college football season would be canceled or postponed to the spring of 2021, which actually did happen in FCS (they played from February-April 2021 except for the Ivy League, which didn't have any sports at all during 2020-'21, largely because of the way their schools travel). In fact, the Big 10, Pac-12 and some other conferences had actually postponed until spring (though eventually, the Big 12, SEC and ACC all wound up starting on time even with slightly truncated seasons) while it was only when a poll came out that stated 55% of voters in Wisconsin and Michigan said whether or not Big 10 FOOTBALL would be played that season would decide their vote in the Presidential Election the Big 10 had to reconsider.  Trump pounced on that to bully the Big 10 into playing leading to their, the Pac-12 and Mid-American conferences playing truncated seasons and Trump bragging about it during the first Presidential Debate.  Had the season been canceled, I could have with Hurts showing enough seen the 49ers doing a trade of multiple first rounders plus possibly Jimmy G for Hurts, and possibly that turned in a three-way where the Eagles also traded Wentz with Jimmy G becoming the Eagles QB.

On 11/24/2022 at 10:23 PM, gameshowfan91 said:

I think I would. Without Wentz, Eagles don't have a Super Bowl. And who would be current Eagles QB?

Could've would've should've is fun to play but in the end it was what it was.

2 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

Oh I definitely think that is what Howie was thinking.  At the time Hurts was taken, it was looking like the 2020 season would be canceled or postponed to the spring of 2021, which actually did happen in FCS (they played from February-April 2021). In fact, the Big 10, Pac-12 and some other conferences had actually postponed until spring (though eventually, the Big 12, SEC and ACC all wound up starting on time even with slightly truncated seasons while it was only when a poll came out that stated 55% of voters in Wisconsin and Michigan said whether or not Big 10 FOOTBALL would be played that season would decide their vote in the Presidential Election the Big 10 had to reconsider.  Trump pounced on that to bully the Big 10 into playing leading to their, the Pac-12 and Mid-American conferences playing truncated seasons and Trump bragging about it during the first Presidential Debate.  

It’s ridiculous to assume in any way Hurts becomes a first. Who’s giving you a first for a guy who didn’t play? There was no chance in the world a team would have given up a first for Hurts when every team in football had a chance to draft him and passed on it. What’s more probable? Howie hoping COVID ruins football and some stupid GM is gonna give up a first for a guy who never played or the Eagles internally realizing that Wentz was never there for any of their critical games and they needed a viable backup who would be his eventual replacement? Howie didn’t need Trump to address the issues of the Eagles. 

1 minute ago, EazyEaglez said:

It’s ridiculous to assume in any way Hurts becomes a first. Who’s giving you a first for a guy who didn’t play? There was no chance in the world a team would have given up a first for Hurts when every team in football had a chance to draft him and passed on it. What’s more probable? Howie hoping COVID ruins football and some stupid GM is gonna give up a first for a guy who never played or the Eagles internally realizing that Wentz was never there for any of their critical games and they needed a viable backup who would be his eventual replacement? Howie didn’t need Trump to address the issues of the Eagles. 

We have seen a lot of stupid GM moves over the years.  All it takes is one. 

On 12/8/2022 at 2:16 PM, Wallyhorse said:

Another reason I would have taken Dak in the 3rd round (Cowboys took him in Round 4) and before him Kirk Cousins over Nick Foles in Round 3 for reasons noted upthread.  One or both of them I think could have won for the Eagles.  

After seeing Hurts being great today, would you still drafted Kirk or Dak? Dak and Kirk are slightly above average at best. Why would you even think of drafting either of them? No way either of them beat Tom Brady on his best day in Super Bowl LII or if Eagles even get #1 seed. If Cousins gets drafted over Foles, I'm not sure they even sign him in 2017. Chip Kelly showed how to use Foles best. Hurts > Kirk and Dak. I don't think Eagles would be anywhere near as good with Kirk or Dak.

It somehow led to a ring. Yes.

4 hours ago, gameshowfan91 said:

After seeing Hurts being great today, would you still drafted Kirk or Dak? Dak and Kirk are slightly above average at best. Why would you even think of drafting either of them? No way either of them beat Tom Brady on his best day in Super Bowl LII or if Eagles even get #1 seed. If Cousins gets drafted over Foles, I'm not sure they even sign him in 2017. Chip Kelly showed how to use Foles best. Hurts > Kirk and Dak. I don't think Eagles would be anywhere near as good with Kirk or Dak.

Hurts came along four years after Dak.  Would Dak have shown enough for the Eagles NOT to take Hurts in Round 2?  That's the question.