1 minute ago, blindside said:

That’s literally what we just did and still lost. 

And now the plan is to literally take the same QB, put a much less talented team around him, and expect to win?

If Hurts on a rookie deal with what amounted to an all-star team surrounding him wasn’t good enough, what makes you think Hurts on $45M a season with a bunch of mid round rookies starting is going to get us over the hump?

What happens if the Eagles trade Wentz after the SB win for a ransom and rallied around Foles?

The question was asked then and anyone who asked it was labeled sacrilegious.

It may be a different right answer this time around, but it’s worth asking.

 

12 minutes ago, TEW said:

It really isn’t. It’s really just a sober look at how the NFL works. 

Who says Hurts is capable of winning a Super Bowl? He hasn’t done it yet, and he had the most talented team in the NFL. An OL literally composed entirely of pro bowlers, a pro bowl RB, 2 #1 WRs, a top tier TE, an all-time level pass rush, a pro bowl littered defensive backfield, and he came up short. He’s NEVER going to have this much talent again in his career.

It’s going to be a LOT harder going forward.

Maybe you miss on a replacement QB and end up with Dak, or maybe you end up with Caleb Williams who is a generational talent, upgrade on Hurts, plus multiple first rounders and win multiple Super Bowls.

 

 

Who says Hurts is capable of winning a Super Bowl?  We just saw him put up one of the best performances that a QB has had in a Super Bowl.  He's obviously capable of winning a Super Bowl.  Because the defensive coordinator fell asleep at the wheel does nothing to change the obvious fact that Hurts is not only capable of taking a team to the Super Bowl but showing up and playing amazing in the biggest game on the biggest stage.

 

Yeah a QB in college Caleb Williams is an upgrade on Hurts.  What the F am I even reading here?  This isn't satire, you are genuinely being serious here.  It's such a shame that some people in this fanbase for whatever reason still have such inability to appreciate Jalen.  He's likely going to go down as the best QB in franchise history with the path he is on.  Instead of being able to enjoy and appreciate that some of you remain fully stubborn in denial about how great Jalen has become. 

 

It's no secret that the best path to being a consistent contender and putting your team in position to win a Super Bowl is by having one of the rare few elite top QBs in the league.  There is a very small amount of them in the league and the Eagles have one of them and he is only 24 years old.  

Just now, eagle45 said:

What happens if the Eagles trade Wentz after the SB win for a ransom and rallied around Foles?

The question was asked then and anyone who asked it was labeled sacrilegious.

It may be a different right answer this time around, but it’s worth asking.

 

Who knows? But to say it’s basically not worth having a good QB unless he’s the absolute best in the world, and maybe to ever play... it’s asinine. At best. What if Mahomes gets injured one year, or gets knocked out in the playoffs or a million things. I can’t even comment on it anymore because it’s just such a loser mentality and it’s making me lose my ish. 

3 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

 

Who says Hurts is capable of winning a Super Bowl?  We just saw him put up one of the best performances that a QB has had in a Super Bowl.  He's obviously capable of winning a Super Bowl.  Because the defensive coordinator fell asleep at the wheel does nothing to change the obvious fact that Hurts is not only capable of taking a team to the Super Bowl but showing up and playing amazing in the biggest game on the biggest stage.

 

Yeah a QB in college Caleb Williams is an upgrade on Hurts.  What the F am I even reading here?  This isn't satire, you are genuinely being serious here.  It's such a shame that some people in this fanbase for whatever reason still have such inability to appreciate Jalen.  He's likely going to go down as the best QB in franchise history with the path he is on.  Instead of being able to enjoy and appreciate that some of you remain fully stubborn in denial about how great Jalen has become. 

 

It's no secret that the best path to being a consistent contender and putting your team in position to win a Super Bowl is by having one of the rare few elite top QBs in the league.  There is a very small amount of them in the league and the Eagles have one of them and he is only 24 years old.  

Dude, seriously... wtf is wrong with you? You’re not wrong, you’re just annoying. Stfu. 
 

How do I get banned? Sign me up

In the tradition of Urlacherzzzzz may I introduce a new word to the blog lexicon...Triggerdzzzzzzzz

7 minutes ago, blindside said:

So... you have a top 5 QB... but you want to take a chance.. at upgrading? It’s like having a million dollars and risking half of it to make an extra $100,000. You’re using lots of words to justify it, but it makes no sense. There’s a lot more "Dak’s” than "Caleb Williams”. And Caleb Williams could bust like most QBs do. 
 

Someone earlier said "I don’t think Hurts could beat Mahomes if the talent around him is the same”. Yeah, no ish. Name QB who can. Burrow has better talent and couldn’t. If you’re gonna keep trading QBs until you have one better than Mahomes.. I mean.. that’s the dumbest ish I’ve ever heard.

OK, given that "yeah, no ish” level of obvious conclusion, explain to me how we are going to win a Super Bowl with Hurts?

Because once we pay Hurts, we are going to have equal talent to the Chiefs.

6 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

What happens if the Eagles trade Wentz after the SB win for a ransom and rallied around Foles?

The question was asked then and anyone who asked it was labeled sacrilegious.

It may be a different right answer this time around, but it’s worth asking.

Foles never played to that level + Wentz was off a torn ACL/LCL. We needed both the following season, as we were rightfully SB contenders in our window. 

Trading Hurts is one thing, but you would need to receive a QB in return or a top 2 pick.

This is a new nfl with these qb contracts.  Every team in the nfl besides the chiefs has a question mark/problem at qb.

Question 1: do we have a franchise qb?  Yes, we do.  So do a handful of other teams.  
 

Question 2: is our franchise qb transcendently  dominant enough to win a SB on a $50m contract and the less talented roster that said contract necessitates?  One team in the NFL can say yes.

Every SB winner, until the landscape changes, will either be the Chiefs, the next team that can answer yes to 2, a team that just gets lucky, or an absolutely stacked team with a qb on a smaller/rookie contract.

 

 

1 minute ago, blindside said:

Dude, seriously... wtf is wrong with you? You’re not wrong, you’re just annoying. Stfu. 
 

How do I get banned? Sign me up

 

Here you go, step by step for you.

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, TEW said:

And now the plan is to literally take the same QB, put a much less talented team around him, and expect to win?

If Hurts on a rookie deal with what amounted to an all-star team surrounding him wasn’t good enough, what makes you think Hurts on $45M a season with a bunch of mid round rookies starting is going to get us over the hump?

Umm.. yeah.. that is the plan. Because without a fluke fumble and a bunch of other horseshit factors, we win that game. In fact, we would have had the same exact situation with UDFA pass rushers, since the field didn’t allow our pass rush to get footing. Save money there. Our DC didn’t have anyone near their pass catchers, so yeah. Without that flukey fumble, we could have almost literally fielded no defense and still won that game. 
 

Yeah, sigh me up for having a QB that can put up 35 points in a Super Bowl, rather than relying on "team talent” that can be negated by other factors. 
 

So.. we had the most talented team, and lost with a top 5 QB. But you want to take a team with the same talent and lesser QB and win? 

4 minutes ago, blindside said:

Who knows? But to say it’s basically not worth having a good QB unless he’s the absolute best in the world, and maybe to ever play... it’s asinine. At best. What if Mahomes gets injured one year, or gets knocked out in the playoffs or a million things. I can’t even comment on it anymore because it’s just such a loser mentality and it’s making me lose my ish. 

No, it’s not asinine.

It’s a financial and historical reality.

You can play what ifs until the cows come home, but just look at the circumstances of actual real world SB winners. It’s basically either best QB in the world or low cost QB.

3 minutes ago, RLC said:

Foles never played to that level + Wentz was off a torn ACL/LCL. We needed both the following season, as we were rightfully SB contenders in our window. 

Trading Hurts is one thing, but you would need to receive a QB in return or a top 2 pick.

I said this yesterday there’s only one player in the league I think is untradable and it’s mahomes. the Chiefs would never trade Patrick Mahomes for whatever you threw their way. I think there’s a next tier of guys like burrow, Josh Allen and Jalen hurts where it would have to be something so incredibly insane and ridiculous to make you even consider wanting to do it. And I don’t see any franchise willing to do that nor do i think it is a given you’d make the trade even with the ridiculousness of the offer.

3 minutes ago, TEW said:

OK, given that "yeah, no ish” level of obvious conclusion, explain to me how we are going to win a Super Bowl with Hurts?

Because once we pay Hurts, we are going to have equal talent to the Chiefs.

Easy. We just did. I don’t understand your point. Our defense was non existent in the Super Bowl. Unbelievably so. Hurts scored more points than Mahomes. So, you just do the same thing and don’t fumble. Are you of the opinion that the "really talented team” mattered in the Super Bowl, because all I saw was a defense that did nothing

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

This is a new nfl with these qb contracts.  Every team in the nfl besides the chiefs has a question mark/problem at qb.

 

 

Just now, blindside said:

Umm.. yeah.. that is the plan. Because without a fluke fumble and a bunch of other horseshit factors, we win that game. In fact, we would have had the same exact situation with UDFA pass rushers, since the field didn’t allow our pass rush to get footing. Save money there. Our DC didn’t have anyone near their pass catchers, so yeah. Without that flukey fumble, we could have almost literally fielded no defense and still won that game. 
 

Yeah, sigh me up for having a QB that can put up 35 points in a Super Bowl, rather than relying on "team talent” that can be negated by other factors. 
 

So.. we had the most talented team, and lost with a top 5 QB. But you want to take a team with the same talent and lesser QB and win? 

Hurts put up 35 WITH "team talent.”

And it still wasn’t enough.

He isn’t going to have "team talent” like we had, going forward. The defense is going to get hallowed out this year and the OL is going to lose 3/5 starters over the next couple years.

The offense with Hurts is sustainable. Hurts was the best player on the field in the SB, which included future Hall of Famers. 

The defense will just have to be less expensive to make up for Hurts' contract. The defense being expensive and "top 10" still lead to one of the worst defensive showings in playoff history. Pay Hurts. Build around the offense. Hope the defense can get turnovers. That's modern football. 

7 minutes ago, RLC said:

Foles never played to that level + Wentz was off a torn ACL/LCL. We needed both the following season, as we were rightfully SB contenders in our window. 

Trading Hurts is one thing, but you would need to receive a QB in return or a top 2 pick.

Right. You have to get the godfather offer. But if you do, it’s a real consideration.

Just now, TEW said:

Hurts put up 35 WITH "team talent.”

And it still wasn’t enough.

He isn’t going to have "team talent” like we had, going forward. The defense is going to get hallowed out this year and the OL is going to lose 3/5 starters over the next couple years.

Well, the defense didn’t show up. So I’m really confused how they make any difference in this argument. The defense in that super bowl might as well have been bottom 3 in the league. 
 

So you’re talking about offense, then. 
 

The offense is gonna be fine. We can afford that level of offense, as long as we keep drafting OL well. 
 

Give me a QB that can out score Mahomes even when his defense doesn’t show up

4 minutes ago, TEW said:

Hurts put up 35 WITH "team talent.”

And it still wasn’t enough.

He isn’t going to have "team talent” like we had, going forward. The defense is going to get hallowed out this year and the OL is going to lose 3/5 starters over the next couple years.

 

The offensive core is in place for the next 2-3 years.  The Eagles are going to have an elite offense for at least that period of time.  Hurts is going to also continue to improve over this course of time as well because that's just what great QBs do as they gain more experience over time.  Kelce will retire at some point but we already have his replacement in house.  Lane will retire in 2 seasons but this organization has always shown the priority and ability to make sure they have great OTs and they have done this over the past two decades while paying top money to QBs.  

 

The defense isn't going to have as much talent as last year but that didn't really matter in the Super Bowl since the coaching and field conditions were so bad on that side of the ball that it completely canceled out the talent on defense.  Now we have a new defensive coordinator and likely an influx of young talent on defense through the draft so you would hope that without the talent from last year that the defense would at least stiil be able to perform better than they did int he Super Bowl with more competent coaching on the defensive side.  Remains to be seen how Desai turns out to be as the DC here but when it comes to playing good QBs it's going to be difficult for him to be much worse than what Gannon was.  

1 minute ago, RLC said:

The offense with Hurts is sustainable. Hurts was the best player on the field in the SB, which included future Hall of Famers. 

The defense will just have to be less expensive to make up for Hurts' contract. The defense being expensive and "top 10" still lead to one of the worst defensive showings in playoff history. Pay Hurts. Build around the offense. Hope the defense can get turnovers. That's modern football. 

The defense didn’t show up in the super bowl. Not having a good defense will be exactly the same

1 minute ago, RLC said:

The offense with Hurts is sustainable. Hurts was the best player on the field in the SB, which included future Hall of Famers. 

The defense will just have to be less expensive to make up for Hurts' contract. The defense being expensive and "top 10" still lead to one of the worst defensive showings in playoff history. Pay Hurts. Build around the offense. Hope the defense can get turnovers. That's modern football. 

Not sure I agree the offense is sustainable. We will lose 3/5 of the OL and a pro bowl RB. And Hurts style of play will almost inevitably result in injury.

The good news is we have a window with 2 top tier WRs.

3 minutes ago, blindside said:

Well, the defense didn’t show up. So I’m really confused how they make any difference in this argument. The defense in that super bowl might as well have been bottom 3 in the league. 
 

So you’re talking about offense, then. 
 

The offense is gonna be fine. We can afford that level of offense, as long as we keep drafting OL well. 
 

Give me a QB that can out score Mahomes even when his defense doesn’t show up

But the defense played really well on the road to the Super Bowl. That’s the thing.. you have to play the whole season with much less depth before you even get playoff seeding and elimination games.

23 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

What happens if the Eagles trade Wentz after the SB win for a ransom and rallied around Foles?

The question was asked then and anyone who asked it was labeled sacrilegious.

It may be a different right answer this time around, but it’s worth asking.

 

butterfly effect dictates we don’t have Hurts and have no shot of making a SB anytime soon unless Howie made some alternate reality bold moves to go Rodgers or something

Just now, TEW said:

But the defense played really well on the road to the Super Bowl. That’s the thing.. you have to play the whole season with much less depth before you even get playoff seeding and elimination games.

But wait.. I thought the problem was having to beat Mahomes... which would mean, in the super bowl. 
 

Hard to kick a FG if the goal posts are always moving