10 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I think Scott is #2 on the depth chart and in the sense that it Sanders missed time, Scott would become the lead back.

In terms of actual playing time, Gainwell crushes Scott in terms of snap counts, at least this year (311 to 146)

Depth charts don't always tell the whole story.  My thought is that Gainwell would become lead back should Sanders go down.  For sure, Howard would have been lead back last year.

I went back and looked to see what happened last year and when Sanders was out it was pretty close.  There was one game that stuck out and Howard had 17 carries to Scott 10.  Otherwise, they had about the same number of carries in the games without Sanders.

The numbers are closer than I thought for sure both last year and this year with Scott getting a bit less of the ball than both Howard and Gainwell.

@LeanMeanGM well picked he eagles to win last week that didn’t happen. Clearly i jinxed them. so i guess back to picking them losing. Also not sure i even got the bonus cause of how everything played out in fantasy lol 

Eagles 2

giants 100

bonus: galladay comes up just short and doesn’t get the 76 receptions for his bonus 

8 minutes ago, garingovt2000 said:

What is the highest our pick can go and same question the lowest?

 

It cannot improve from 10. Could drop as low as 16ish 

I cannot for the life of me understand why the FCS Championship game is on at 2 PM on Sunday. It's like they deliberately don't want anyone to watch it.

Just now, metal said:

I cannot for the life of me understand why the FCS Championship game is on at 2 PM on Sunday. It's like they deliberately don't want anyone to watch it.

Should be an interesting affair this year as well.  The two teams are basically rivals.

3 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Depth charts don't always tell the whole story.  My thought is that Gainwell would become lead back should Sanders go down.  For sure, Howard would have been lead back last year.

I went back and looked to see what happened last year and when Sanders was out it was pretty close.  There was one game that stuck out and Howard had 17 carries to Scott 10.  Otherwise, they had about the same number of carries in the games without Sanders.

See my edit. KG touches the ball 70/311 snaps, or 22.5% of the time he’s in.

Scott meanwhile touches it 50/146, or 34%.

Scotts snap count this year is really low because Sanders has managed to stay healthy most of the year. If Sanders missed significant time, Scott’s snap counts would go way up and he’d be the lead back. Gainwell’s role would remain unchanged and a third back would be added to take Scott’s current role

8 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

See my edit. KG touches the ball 70/311 snaps, or 22.5% of the time he’s in.

Scott meanwhile touches it 50/146, or 34%.

Scotts snap count this year is really low because Sanders has managed to stay healthy most of the year. If Sanders missed significant time, Scott’s snap counts would go way up and he’d be the lead back. Gainwell’s role would remain unchanged and a third back would be added to take Scott’s current role

That's not how I see it and you can't judge it by the numbers you show in this post.  Plenty of reasons for that.  One are the carries Scott gets in mop up time which are more than Gainwell (didn't look that up but that's my thinking).  As far as I see it, the best data we have are the four games that Sanders missed last year.  Howard had more carries than Scott in those games though it was really close in three of the games.

In any case, no way to know for sure.  I'll concede on that point.  My eyeball test says Gainwell is #2 but that's just me.

Both seem IR bound 

3 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

That's not how I see it and you can't judge it by the numbers you show in this post.  Plenty of reasons for that.  One are the carries Scott gets in mop up time which are more than Gainwell (didn't look that up but that's my thinking).  As far as I see it, the best data we have are the four games that Sanders missed last year.  Howard had more carries than Scott in those games though it was really close in three of the games.

In any case, no way to know for sure.  I'll concede on that point.  My eyeball test says Gainwell is #2 but that's just me.

What does Jordan Howard have to do with this team this year? If Sanders goes down Scott takes his role. Gainwell isn’t a lead back, and likely never will be

42 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

So what? He’s a reliable good one of those. Many aren’t. 

All I said was, he's a JAG.  Not a positive, nor a negative, just an assessment.  Against anyone else, he's just a JAG.  Against the Giants, for whatever reason, he matches up really well and has had his best games, bar none.  

 

As far as his 'reliability' as a JAG, I suppose that's something.   But, he's a guy that the team should have been looking to upgrade... and if he beats out the guy that they bring in, then so be it.  The concern I have with Scott hasn't been his presence on the team.  My concern has been, and continues to be, their contentment with him.  Even more concerning, in a game that they should have relied on their backup RBs... with their top runner banged up and their top QB out... they basically ignored both him and Gainwell, which speaks to the coaches' opinion of him as well, especially in reference to the pass defense strength versus run defense strength of their opponent.   Maybe the coaches just had a gaffe, or maybe it means more.  Either way, I think it definitely means that they weren't looking for ways to get the ball in their hands... in a game they desperately needed to have someone make a play.

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Both seem IR bound 

Making room for Quinn and CJGJ.

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

All I said was, he's a JAG.  Not a positive, nor a negative, just an assessment.  Against anyone else, he's just a JAG.  Against the Giants, for whatever reason, he matches up really well and has had his best games, bar none.  

 

As far as his 'reliability' as a JAG, I suppose that's something.   But, he's a guy that the team should have been looking to upgrade... and if he beats out the guy that they bring in, then so be it.  The concern I have with Scott hasn't been his presence on the team.  My concern has been, and continues to be, their contentment with him.  Even more concerning, in a game that they should have relied on their backup RBs... with their top runner banged up and their top QB out... they basically ignored both him and Gainwell, which speaks to the coaches' opinion of him as well, especially in reference to the pass defense strength versus run defense strength of their opponent.   Maybe the coaches just had a gaffe, or maybe it means more.  Either way, I think it definitely means that they weren't looking for ways to get the ball in their hands... in a game they desperately needed to have someone make a play.

As a fan it’s frustrating that Sermon hasn’t been given looks. I guess the coaches feel Scott is reliable, and likely better off as far as the mental aspect goes. But from everything I’ve seen, Sermon has more athletic ability than Scott. 
 

Scott is kinda like vanilla ice cream. Plain, boring, but you know what you’re getting (and I like vanilla ice cream). And there’s some value in that, but you could also expand your tastes a bit and do a lot better

7 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Both seem IR bound 

I love the idea of never seeing Shaun Bradley play a meaningful snap for the Eagles again.

1 minute ago, TorontoEagle said:

As a fan it’s frustrating that Sermon hasn’t been given looks. I guess the coaches feel Scott is reliable, and likely better off as far as the mental aspect goes. But from everything I’ve seen, Sermon has more athletic ability than Scott. 
 

Scott is kinda like vanilla ice cream. Plain, boring, but you know what you’re getting (and I like vanilla ice cream). And there’s some value in that, but you could also expand your tastes a bit and do a lot better

If Sanders goes elsewhere in 2023 I think you'll see a big change in the RBBC.  Gainwell would likely still be the "receiving RB" but Scott would be gone as well.  I suspect they would draft a Sanders replacement and sign a FA RB as insurance.  

It's almost comical that Gainwell averages 7.4 yards per catch, where Sanders averages a paltry 3.9 and Scott is even lower at 3.0

How anyone can be confident going into this game is beyond me.  I can see 2-3 ways the Eagles lose this game, let alone the game even being close.

If Minshew starts, prepare for a 4 quarter game.

If Hurts' shoulder isnt 100%, prepare for a close game.

If the same dogshit gameplan is used, we might actually lose.

And you know whoever the hell plays QB for the Giants is going to eviscerate the zone coverage that we inexplicably use for their entire first two 12 play, 80 yard TD drives 

 

 

Just now, TorontoEagle said:

As a fan it’s frustrating that Sermon hasn’t been given looks. I guess the coaches feel Scott is reliable, and likely better off as far as the mental aspect goes. But from everything I’ve seen, Sermon has more athletic ability than Scott. 
 

Scott is kinda like vanilla ice cream. Plain, boring, but you know what you’re getting (and I like vanilla ice cream). And there’s some value in that, but you could also expand your tastes a bit and do a lot better

Based on his usage against the Saints, the coaches feel he had very little to contribute.

1 hour ago, metal said:

IWTETG thread in 3..2..

I still say his hit to the head on Wentz was a deliberate cheap shot in the playoffs, and Wentz was never the same afterward. 

10 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

What does Jordan Howard have to do with this team this year? If Sanders goes down Scott takes his role. Gainwell isn’t a lead back, and likely never will be

What makes so sure Scott takes over? He didn’t take over last year.

1 minute ago, Mike31mt said:

How anyone can be confident going into this game is beyond me.  I can see 2-3 ways the Eagles lose this game, let alone the game even being close.

 

 

 

1) Gannon Soft zone

2) Driscoll RT

3) Shane/Siri's reluctance to run the ball with Rb's consistently from the start of the game. 

2 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

3) Shane/Siri's reluctance to run the ball with Rb's consistently from the start of the game. 

This gets my vote.  The problem that put us in this situation.

1 minute ago, Ipiggles said:

1) Gannon Soft zone

2) Driscoll RT

3) Shane/Siri's reluctance to run the ball with Rb's consistently from the start of the game. 

Ish I didnt even think about the RT turnstile.   There are 4-5 legitimate ways we could lose this game.  Backups or not, that's just how horribly this team has looked for the last 3 weeks.

11 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

All I said was, he's a JAG.  Not a positive, nor a negative, just an assessment.  Against anyone else, he's just a JAG.  Against the Giants, for whatever reason, he matches up really well and has had his best games, bar none.  

 

As far as his 'reliability' as a JAG, I suppose that's something.   But, he's a guy that the team should have been looking to upgrade... and if he beats out the guy that they bring in, then so be it.  The concern I have with Scott hasn't been his presence on the team.  My concern has been, and continues to be, their contentment with him.  Even more concerning, in a game that they should have relied on their backup RBs... with their top runner banged up and their top QB out... they basically ignored both him and Gainwell, which speaks to the coaches' opinion of him as well, especially in reference to the pass defense strength versus run defense strength of their opponent.   Maybe the coaches just had a gaffe, or maybe it means more.  Either way, I think it definitely means that they weren't looking for ways to get the ball in their hands... in a game they desperately needed to have someone make a play.

Gainwell is the issue for me. I absolutely want an upgrade there. Scott is the reliable dude deep on the roster who you can count on. His job replacing Covey as KR this year is an example. He’s the guy at your work you can plug in somewhere for a period and get a solid minimum level of output from until you can find a better solution. No risk. 

Just now, DrPhilly said:

Gainwell is the issue for me. I absolutely want an upgrade there. Scott is the reliable dude deep on the roster who you can count on. His job replacing Covey as KR this year is an example. He’s the guy at your work you can plug in somewhere for a period and get a solid minimum level of output from until you can find a better solution. No risk. 

Well... herein lies the problem either way.  Whether its Gainwell or Scott... I think we can both agree the RB room is deficient in sufficient talent behind Sanders.   I personally wanted a big back on the roster somewhere... and neither Gainwell nor Scott fits that description.

44 minutes ago, garingovt2000 said:

Any chance Panthers beat the Saints this weekend?

 

No