Our offense in 2026 by age (took today's age + 3).

QB: Hurts (27)
LT: Mailata (28)
LG: Dickerson (27)
C: Jurgens (26)
RG: ???
RT: ???
TE: Goedert (31)
RB: ???
WR: Smith (27)
WR: Brown (28)

RB is the easiest position to draft and replace.
Stoutland is the best OL coach in the NFL (at worst he's top 5), so RG will be fine. iOL is also a relatively easier position to replace, but this can be done with a day 2 pick (see Seumalo, Dickerson, Jurgens) or a free agent (Mathis, Brooks).

Basically we need to replace Lane Johnson and RT. That's pretty much it. We will use a 1st round pick on a RT this year or next year. I would bet money on that.

Look at the age curves. The offense is ready to roll for 2023-2026. 

23 minutes ago, blindside said:

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

I think having a really good defensive coordinator is absolutely critical in todays nfl. I said this during the season and then I said it after the Super Bowl, I think Jonathan Gannon is a good regular season defensive coordinator.  there’s enough bad and mediocre quarterbacks and pedestrian offensive lines that you could play that style and win a lot of games. But when you get to the playoffs against better quarterbacks and offenses unless you knock the quarterback out of the game, you are going to have trouble.  this has shown to be true this past year against the Lions, Cowboys, with dak, and the Chiefs. We can say whatever we want about the defense, but the two games Patrick Mahomes has played against the Eagles in his career have Both been top 5 his best per EPA.  Sheila Kapadia gave a whole bunch of analytics and stats telling you this was one of the worst defensive performances the Eagles have had since 2000. Mind blowing it ranked 394th out of 400 games over that time in terms of success rate and epa per drive against the defense  

You need a good schemer who is quick with his adjustments. Also not afraid to get out of his comfort zone during the season so he can try things so it’s not dropped all at one time and guys aren’t comfortable with it or it’s not second nature. I do not think the Bengals had the talent that the eagles defense had this year or last playoffs. However, their DC comes up with good game plans and schemes to slow the chiefs down and make some plays against them. He also adjusts accordingly to the point they usually are improving throughout the game. They’ve held the chiefs to 3 points in the 4th quarter of their last 3 games and the field-goal they got was because of some stupid penalty they got.

 you have to have talent on defense. Which means you have to draft well on that side of the ball and use resources somewhat high to get big impact players. Also spend wisely in free agency on that side of the ball. Not overpay for Malik Jackson but find guys like Hargrave that you identify the fit and you hit on. Helps to also make trades like CJGJ that are good and not Robert Quinn type trades. But we also need  DC that’s at his best against the best. That doesn’t mean he hast to be great and pitch a shutout or hold under 20, it just means he can’t be completely incompetent like we were for most of that game.

 

1 minute ago, Ace Nova said:

That’s a losing recipe. What we need is the same talent we had when we lost the Super Bowl, only with a crappier QB. Draft a guy in the 6th round every four years and really play 4D chess

33 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.

The goal isn’t QB centric.  The QB is only one starter out of 25.  Even if he is 5 times more impactful than the average that only makes his impact 20% of the total team impact (100% divided by 25 = 4% times 5 = 20%).  The approach is the same as having a balanced portfolio of stocks, bonds and other financial instruments.  What investment bankers are balancing is risk vs. reward.  
 

By sticking with QBs who are still on their rookie contract, you are accepting a "reward” that doesn’t try and achieve "better than Mahomes” Rather the reward is more likely to be "better than Matthew Stafford or Nick Foles or Joe Flacco or Eli Manning or Brad Johnsonor Trent Dilfer or Mark Rypien or Jeff Hostetler or Doug Williams or Phil Simms or Jim McMahon”

Besides the fact that all of those QBs were Super Bowl winners, they also shared something in common … the team they were part of was better in the non-QB parts than it was at QB … and better than all the other teams in the NFL that year.

3 minutes ago, mattwill said:

The goal isn’t QB centric.  The QB is only one starter out of 25.  Even if he is 5 times more impactful than the average that only makes his impact 20% of the total team impact (100% divided by 25 = 4% times 5 = 20%).  The approach is the same as having a balanced portfolio of stocks, bonds and other financial instruments.  What investment bankers are balancing is risk vs. reward.  
 

By sticking with QBs who are still on their rookie contract, you are accepting a "reward” that doesn’t try and achieve "better than Mahomes” Rather the reward is more likely to be "better than Matthew Stafford or Nick Foles or Joe Flacco or Eli Manning or Brad Johnsonor Trent Dilfer or Mark Rypien or Jeff Hostetler or Doug Williams or Phil Simms or Jim McMahon”

Besides the fact that all of those QBs were Super Bowl winners, they also shared something in common … the team they were part of was better in the non-QB parts than it was at QB … and better than all the other teams in the NFL that year.

I’m sorry, but all of your examples except one have another thing in common: they all played out of their minds and way above their means in those Super Bowl runs. Let’s not act like 2017 Nick Foles is a sustainable recipe for success. Y’all should hydrate. These mental gymnastics have got to be draining. 

36 minutes ago, blindside said:

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? 

But you wouldn’t have a team with the same talent.  Howie would hav $45 million more of cap space to spend on Free Agents and he also would have at least 5 extra Day One and Day Two draft picks to add quality to the roster.

Think back on the last time you balanced your investment portfolio.  When you sold any of those existing investments, did you take the cash and stuff it into your mattress? Of course you didn’t.  You took the cash and purchased other investments … and your overall portfolio was stronger.

34 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

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.  

It’s been 20+ years since we’ve had an influx of young defensive talent through the draft, so let’s not count those chickens.

1 minute ago, mattwill said:

But you wouldn’t have a team with the same talent.  Howie would hav $45 million more of cap space to spend on Free Agents and he also would have at least 5 extra Day One and Day Two draft picks to add quality to the roster.

Think back on the last time you balanced your investment portfolio.  When you sold any of those existing investments, did you take the cash and stuff it into your mattress? Of course you didn’t.  You took the cash and purchased other investments … and your overall portfolio was stronger.

That doesn’t make any sense. They weren’t paying him $45 million last year. That’s whole crux of your argument. It’s not an extra 45 million. It’s the same as it was last year. When they pay Hurts, it’ll be 45 million LESS. But it’s not 45 million more. That math doesn’t work

36 minutes ago, RLC said:

Our offense in 2026 by age (took today's age + 3).

QB: Hurts (27)
LT: Mailata (28)
LG: Dickerson (27)
😄 Jurgens (26)
RG: ???
RT: ???
TE: Goedert (31)
RB: ???
WR: Smith (27)
WR: Brown (28)

RB is the easiest position to draft and replace.
Stoutland is the best OL coach in the NFL (at worst he's top 5), so RG will be fine. iOL is also a relatively easier position to replace, but this can be done with a day 2 pick (see Seumalo, Dickerson, Jurgens) or a free agent (Mathis, Brooks).

Basically we need to replace Lane Johnson and RT. That's pretty much it. We will use a 1st round pick on a RT this year or next year. I would bet money on that.

Look at the age curves. The offense is ready to roll for 2023-2026. 

Let's add a dynamic young RB to go along with this group in Gibbs and a do it all closer in Mattison. 

Look at the percentage the QBs cap takes up. Not the number. You need context. 
I don’t care if a QB is making $100,000,000 a year if the total cap is $550,000,000. 
 

If Hurts’ cap is $50,000,000 a year, and the cap in 2024 is projected to be $256,000,000, that’s less than 20%. If he maintains around $50,000,000 a year, that cap percentage drops significantly every year after.

The QB market gets reset every year. The massive contracts that get signed now, become bargains later. 
 

If you have a QB like Hurts you need to keep him and draft well to be successful. It’s not easy to find a QB in the draft, even if you have a top draft pick. 
 

Go look at teams like the Raiders, Texans, Jags, Dolphins, who have been looking for QBs for years. The vast majority of teams don’t have a QB that could even get them to the conference championship. How many times has Dak lifted his team in the playoffs? Kirk Cousins? Tua? Derek Carr?

You pay someone like Hurts not only for his playing ability, but also how he can bring in free agents at reduced cost as we saw Brandon Graham mention. 

2 hours ago, eagle45 said:

That was my suspicion.  I don’t think good in the box, ok in coverage, and a likely irreproducible INT total justify a mega contract at S.

I always thought Maddox projected exceptionally well at safety…

If you keep Epps and use Maddox in that role, then we can just pummel the CB position in a pretty deep and talented draft.

I would seriously consider Epps primarily deep S with Maddox and when they go to the nickel play Blakenship.  Real curious about Tristin McCollum. He and his twin were really good at Sam Houston.  Fact the Eagles swooped in and grabbed him to a reserve contract from the Texans suggests some interest.  Tall and decent (4.4) speed. Green but spent a year on Texans PS.  Twin brother Zyon was a 5th for Tampa Bay last year.  

50 minutes ago, blindside said:

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

Have to make the playoffs and win the NFCCG to play Mahomes. Does this really need to be explained how it’s not moving the goalposts?

All this talk really boils down to "don’t suck at drafting.”

8 minutes ago, TEW said:

Have to make the playoffs and win the NFCCG to play Mahomes. Does this really need to be explained how it’s not moving the goalposts?

Actually, I’d really like you to explain this perfect team building strategy you seem to have figured out. Basically, we field the team we did last year, and just draft QBs every four years and hope for the best? Have a strong team that can win you all the games to get to the super bowl, and then, since the final boss will inevitably always be Mahomes, and you can’t win with a good QB anyway, just get to the dance and hope your young rotation of inexpensive QBs can play the game of their life and put up 40+. Does that about sum it up?

38 minutes ago, blindside said:

I’m sorry, but all of your examples except one have another thing in common: they all played out of their minds and way above their means in those Super Bowl runs. Let’s not act like 2017 Nick Foles is a sustainable recipe for success. Y’all should hydrate. These mental gymnastics have got to be draining. 

Very few of those QBs played out of their minds and way above their mean.  In most cases they played within themselves. Only four of the ones listed were the SB MVP.  

2 hours ago, TEW said:

Let me go on the record that I believe I was the first person who suggested trading Hurts as an option.

And for me, at least, it’s still an option.

If someone offers a godfather deal, I’m taking it. It’s nothing against Hurts. He’s done everything anyone could have ever asked of him. He’s worked his arse off to become one of the best players in the NFL. A true MVP candidate and all-pro level player.

But the fact is this: as good as Hurts is, his contract is going to make it very difficult to put a deep, talented team on the field. And his play style has a relatively high probability of resulting in an injury.

For me the goal isn’t to have a great QB. The goal is to win a Super Bowl. Having a great QB is correlated with winning a Super Bowl, but I’m not sure Hurts is going to out QB Mahomes with equal talent around him.

Given that, if someone offers me 3 firsts+ I’m definitely considering it. That’s not me hating Hurts, I actually really like him and am incredibly impressed with him as a player and person. But I have to be dispassionate and do what’s in the best interest of the team to win a Super Bowl. Getting a slew of draft picks plus an extra $40+ million in cap space per year over the next 4-6 years might give us a better chance at a Super Bowl.

Anyone who doesn’t see this as a logical option is too emotionally involved with Hurts…and probably more of a fan of Hurts than the team as a whole.  It is logical, and I find myself leaning that way sometimes. 

The fact of the matter is that good to great QBs are just simply overpaid.  It is possible for Hurts to be a great QB and also be overpaid at the same time.  

I also see the only years we’ve been true competitors is when we’ve had QBs on rookie deals.  Not sure that’s a coincidence.

The elephant in the room with this approach is the locker room reaction to trading away a truly respected leader.  Not sure there is a player in that room that doesn’t love the guy.  It would not be a positive reaction (to say the least) and I don’t think it can be discounted as a non-factor.  I can’t see them doing it for that reason….and I get it

13 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

All this talk really boils down to "don’t suck at drafting.”

That and have an extra $45 million of cap money to play with every year.

I hope they do trade Hurts. The entire world would implode. The guys on the team, fans, National analysts.. but a few guys on a message board would be quick to point out how they’re playing the long game by constantly having a question mark at the most important position in sports because maybe they can afford a couple more free agents. 

24 minutes ago, wussbasket said:

Look at the percentage the QBs cap takes up. Not the number. You need context. 
I don’t care if a QB is making $100,000,000 a year if the total cap is $550,000,000. 
 

If Hurts’ cap is $50,000,000 a year, and the cap in 2024 is projected to be $256,000,000, that’s less than 20%. If he maintains around $50,000,000 a year, that cap percentage drops significantly every year after.

The QB market gets reset every year. The massive contracts that get signed now, become bargains later. 
 

If you have a QB like Hurts you need to keep him and draft well to be successful. It’s not easy to find a QB in the draft, even if you have a top draft pick. 
 

Go look at teams like the Raiders, Texans, Jags, Dolphins, who have been looking for QBs for years. The vast majority of teams don’t have a QB that could even get them to the conference championship. How many times has Dak lifted his team in the playoffs? Kirk Cousins? Tua? Derek Carr?

You pay someone like Hurts not only for his playing ability, but also how he can bring in free agents at reduced cost as we saw Brandon Graham mention. 

Good response.  Thank you for the thoughtful contribution to the conversation. 

1 minute ago, mattwill said:

That and have an extra $45 million of cap money to play with every year.

 

3 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Very few of those QBs played out of their minds and way above their mean.  In most cases they played within themselves. Only four of the ones listed were the SB MVP.  

Ok, mediocre QBs are the logical recipe for success in the NFL. You win. Have at it 

2 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Good response.  Thank you for the thoughtful contribution to the conversation. 

 

Not at all like your thoughtless contribution baselessly claiming I'm racist out of nowhere for no reason.  

40 minutes ago, blindside said:

That doesn’t make any sense. They weren’t paying him $45 million last year. That’s whole crux of your argument. It’s not an extra 45 million. It’s the same as it was last year. When they pay Hurts, it’ll be 45 million LESS. But it’s not 45 million more. That math doesn’t work

The math does work.  You just aren’t looking at the whole picture.  The current cap make up is team wide not simply a single player.  Howie brought in at least $45 million of free agents to make up the 2023 top of the line roster.  With $45 million less cap money he couldn’t repeat that.

44 minutes ago, mattwill said:

But you wouldn’t have a team with the same talent.  Howie would hav $45 million more of cap space to spend on Free Agents and he also would have at least 5 extra Day One and Day Two draft picks to add quality to the roster.

Think back on the last time you balanced your investment portfolio.  When you sold any of those existing investments, did you take the cash and stuff it into your mattress? Of course you didn’t.  You took the cash and purchased other investments … and your overall portfolio was stronger.

I understand what you are saying and if I’m thinking with my head and not my heart I think it’s unlikely Hurts stays healthy for much longer. That said I think he’s SO good that you sort of have no choice but to go with the bird in hand on this one. 
 

I don’t think the team was as talented as we thought it was and I think when Jalen was out it really showed. Even in the Super Bowl I think of lot of the talent on defense (along with Gannon) was exposed. Jalen is the engine. 

3 minutes ago, McMVP said:

Anyone who doesn’t see this as a logical option is too emotionally involved with Hurts…and probably more of a fan of Hurts than the team as a whole.  It is logical, and I find myself leaning that way sometimes. 

The fact of the matter is that good to great QBs are just simply overpaid.  It is possible for Hurts to be a great QB and also be overpaid at the same time.  

I also see the only years we’ve been true competitors is when we’ve had QBs on rookie deals.  Not sure that’s a coincidence.

The elephant in the room with this approach is the locker room reaction to trading away a truly respected leader.  Not sure there is a player in that room that doesn’t love the guy.  It would not be a positive reaction (to say the least) and I don’t think it can be discounted as a non-factor.  I can’t see them doing it for that reason….and I get it

But I’m this fantasy world, we’d have to actually be in a position to draft a good QB and get lucky enough that he’s able to win. It’s all hypothetical, so it’s easy to be like "we’ll just get another Trent Dilfer and have all this extra money.” But a lot has to happen for this fantasy to even remotely have a chance to work. It’s all just a bunch projection based on nothing. "A QB on a rookie deal”. What a joke of a premise. WHAT F-ING QB?!? 
 

Yeah, QBs are over paid. You know why? Because so few of them are any good.