1 minute ago, Westbrook#36 said:

No way Sunday Night Football started 16 years ago. No freakin way.

 

3 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Started on NBC 16 years ago, used to be ESPN with MNF on ABC

And Thursday Night Football too. I was talking with my wife about SNF and TNF being new things and she says you know they've been on for like fifteen years, right?

I had to look it up.

1 minute ago, MillerTime said:

I am willing to bet every QB has nagging injuries that affect their play at some point in every season.

That affect the main aspect of their game? I doubt it. Sure they might have some bruised ribs here and there, maybe some guys have ankle soreness but how many of those revolve their entire game around running?

How many QBs are on their teams injured list right now?

I still told her she was wrong. It's 16 not 15.

8 minutes ago, MillerTime said:

I will go off trends. The DCs in the NFL had all last offseason to study him and he got better. He has got better every year. You have to pay him this offseason or trade him. The money/asset loss of not doing either will really hurt this team.

And he is 24. A 4 year extension will be fine. Every position in the NFL besides kicker and punter take more body abuse even with his running.

I admit it is a risk.  As of right now, his game play is dependent on him being effective as both a runner and passer.   With a dinged ankle, his effectiveness drops off.  With a dinged shoulder, his effectiveness drops off.  

 

So, to answer the question asked... I'd ask Hurts to play the final year of his deal and make him play at the level he did this year two years in a row.  I think that's a fair stance.  And I have the franchise tag, so I can get a 2nd year... plus the second franchise tag value after that, so he's under control for this team for 3 more seasons.   That last season might be expensive... so I'd likely want to get that extension worked out before then.

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I admit it is a risk.  As of right now, his game play is dependent on him being effective as both a runner and passer.   With a dinged ankle, his effectiveness drops off.  With a dinged shoulder, his effectiveness drops off.  

 

So, to answer the question asked... I'd ask Hurts to play the final year of his deal and make him play at the level he did this year two years in a row.  I think that's a fair stance.  And I have the franchise tag, so I can get a 2nd year... plus the second franchise tag value after that, so he's under control for this team for 3 more seasons.   That last season might be expensive... so I'd likely want to get that extension worked out before then.

Preach. Keep the window open a little longer.

If he's Neo, aka The One, he's gonna get the Brinks truck treatment eventually.

Frustrating game for Green Bay. They’ve been in control for most of this game and find themselves trailing now. 

Just now, BDawk_ASamuel said:

Frustrating game for Green Bay. They’ve been in control for most of this game and find themselves trailing now. 

Surprised to see their secondary giving up big plays. Especially after last week.

8 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I admit it is a risk.  As of right now, his game play is dependent on him being effective as both a runner and passer.   With a dinged ankle, his effectiveness drops off.  With a dinged shoulder, his effectiveness drops off.  

 

So, to answer the question asked... I'd ask Hurts to play the final year of his deal and make him play at the level he did this year two years in a row.  I think that's a fair stance.  And I have the franchise tag, so I can get a 2nd year... plus the second franchise tag value after that, so he's under control for this team for 3 more seasons.   That last season might be expensive... so I'd likely want to get that extension worked out before then.

Franchise tagging a QB is rare. There is a very short list of QBs that has that happen. There is a reason for that too. How is every player on the team expected to get behind the QB if the people running the team won’t? And it limits the cap more than giving Hurts an extension for at least that year. Not extending him is not worth the risk.

Wow. Apparently a Steeler player after getting a sack celebrated with a mock CPR celebration. Read the room dude....   

17 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

McNabb would likely have at least a ring (maybe more) had they valued the WR position at any point (other than the TO year) during his career.   The one year he actually had a true #1 receiver he made it to the Super Bowl.

Imagine McNabb with this offense.   👀

2004 we made the SB without Owens if you remember. Season likely plays out the same if we had him or not, albeit maybe with fewer regular season wins. We handled the NFC playoffs with TO out

AJ on those early 2000 teams though you have to remember who our GM was. If he paid AJ then he wouldn’t have paid Dawkins, or otherwise Runyan, or maybe Vincent. Going all in was not a Joe Banner move

11 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

McNabb would likely have at least a ring (maybe more) had they valued the WR position at any point (other than the TO year) during his career.   The one year he actually had a true #1 receiver he made it to the Super Bowl.

Imagine McNabb with this offense.   👀

He choked hard in the SB when he had a #1 and he pretty much had excellent weapons for the balance of his career after that.

Rodgers is ready for the season to be over so Blue of Earth and him can head to the rainforest and get stoned on tea.

The one hang up I see with a Hurts extension is dependent on Lamar. He’s going to push for a fully guaranteed contract after Watson got his. The team is going to push back about him getting hurt again. I think it’s going to be similar with Hurts. 

2 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

He choked hard in the SB when he had a #1 and he pretty much had excellent weapons for the balance of his career after that.

Mcnabb’s career was a tale of 2 tapes. 2000-2004 he was a dramatically more reliable player than 2005-2009.

Once the injuries and the dirt balls started, our SB chances went downhill. 2008 was fun, but I still can’t believe how badly 2009 ended

2 minutes ago, MillerTime said:

Franchise tagging a QB is rare. There is a very short list of QBs that has that happen. There is a reason for that too. How is every player on the team expected to get behind the QB if the people running the team won’t? And it limits the cap more than giving Hurts an extension for at least that year. Not extending him is not worth the risk.

Franchise tag on a QB is fairly rare, but it has happened.  And more importantly, it isn't a foregone conclusion that the Eagles would have to use it.  But, it is an option if after next year I want to sign him to 'X' and he wants 'Y'.   Meaning, I have a fall back and he can't just get away from me.  

 

We disagree and that's ok.

Watson might just be OROTY

Edit: Kenneth Walker had a great year, but his team might be on the outside looking in

2 minutes ago, Uscg-green said:

Rodgers is ready for the season to be over so Blue of Earth and him can head to the rainforest and get stoned on tea.

Try to keep up. He’s cradle robbing now.
 

11 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

He choked hard in the SB when he had a #1 and he pretty much had excellent weapons for the balance of his career after that.

No way lol. From '05-07 he was throwing to just Brian Westbrook. He got two years with DeSean and one year with Maclin.

I do agree with the overall point that McNabb was good, but not great. He under-delivered in big moments time and time again.

I would franchise tag Jalen before I commit to him with a massive contract. Even if you end up paying him more on a year by year basis by waiting to do a deal, it's worth it. We need more time to see just how valuable Hurts is.

Just now, LeanMeanGM said:

Try to keep up. He’s cradle robbing now.
 

Hippy chick gone? Now it looks like he's into girls with pre pubescent looking bodies I guess. What about his shroom tea? That gone too?

11 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

So much depends on all the permutations in how Howie attacks the offseason.

If Bradberry and Sanders both walk, the Eagles will be looking to the draft for 3 immediate starter needs...right side of OL, outside CB, and RB.  It's tough to hand those responsibilities to anything less than a 2nd round pick.  So trading down may be off the table.

 

I could see a Seumalo extension. Shouldn't be any bank breaker. His teammates really seem to love him. Johnson will back for the next two years. Draft a OT project early on day 3. 
RB could be drafted day 2 and you could sign a cheap vet, I mentioned Foreman from the Panthers. 
If Howie doesn't go for another 1 year band-aid across from Slay you have to use a day 1 pick on CB it seems. There's not much there in terms of high upside outside DB's on this team so round 1 makes a lot of sense.
Very interesting and important off season. A ton of work to do with critical decisions looming. 

I would say it could be a rip the band-aid off kind of year. If Kelce retires, let Cox, Graham, Sanders and Hargrave all go. That helps the cap.

Extend Hurts, Seumalo, Chauncey. But the team will take a step back and probably put a bad taste in the mouths of a lot of guys here. It's not this front offices style either to do something like this, so I doubt it.

4 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

The one hang up I see with a Hurts extension is dependent on Lamar. He’s going to push for a fully guaranteed contract after Watson got his. The team is going to push back about him getting hurt again. I think it’s going to be similar with Hurts. 

I think the big difference is Hurts has a real agent telling him that’s stupid.

Lamar’s agent is his mom

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Try to keep up. He’s cradle robbing now.
 

Gonna need to see two forms of ID Aaron

Just now, Aerolithe_Lion said:

2004 we made the SB without Owens if you remember. Season likely plays out the same if we had him or not, albeit maybe with fewer regular seaso wins

AJ on those early 2000 teams though you have to remember who are GM was. If he paid AJ then he wouldn’t have paid Dawkins, or Runyan, or Vincent. Going all in was not a Joe Banner move

We won 2 playoff games without Owens but the team’s overall season was what it was because McNabb had Owens.   And the Super Bowl isn’t nearly as close as it was without TO.

Yeah, Banner really didn’t value the WR position.  And that’s my point.  I think making it to 3 straight championship games early in his career without legitimate #1 receivers basically made Banner (or even Reid at the time) think they didn’t necessarily need one for the offense (with McNabb) to succeed.   So they used the money in other areas, etc.  

The one year they acquired TO, they refused to give him another contract the next year (maybe justifiably so) but that era ended and so did them making it to the Super Bowl.