35 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Not a Jersey in the joint.  Where can I get a good chicken Cesar salad or wrap in this town, preferably with a glass of vino.  Do you get out in the Flint Hills much?  This year the Nature Conservancy is opening their tall grass prairie preserve and as a member, I can’t wait. 

Been to the flint hills once last year, we drove out to Manhatten where K st is just to go to NY style pizza place, sell em by the slice or whole pies, best pizza I've had in all of KS, then down the street they had a tall grass prairie I guess museum? It was pretty cool I learned more about tall grass prairies then I ever knew. Then we drove out in the middle of nowhere flint hills took a hike in a tall  grass prairie preserve where at the end of the hike are wild Bison, I'd seen Bison in Yellowstone before but seeing them in the prairie where there used to be millions of them was pretty cool from a safe distance.

Sounds awesome hope the new preserve is cool!

7 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

The holdup with Yosemite thus far has been every time I either try to package it into another trip or head there on its own, the lodging is insanely expensive and reasonable accommodations seem like hours away. Maybe I’m also looking last minute and that’s the consequence.

It's a really popular park, and there's like a bazillion people in California, and yeah it is one of the pricier parks as lodging in surrounding areas is more expensive than say a hotel is going to be in hurricane Utah which is a po.dunk town 20 minutes out of Zions.

I lived in SF for 5 years and never went to Yosemite because it was always a lot tougher to get into/pay for etc. During that same time I probably went to arches,Bryce Zion, 3-4 times because those were just so much more accessible.

Good luck though, maybe one of these days I'll get to Yosemite too!

25 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

Have yet to be to Galveston or any beach close to it. Usually we go to Port Arkansas or make the trek down to South Padre Island if we go to Texas beaches. Heading to Galveston for the first time next month for a cruise.

Not too bad being an Eagles fan here in Austin. Very few native Texans you come across these days. Very much a transplant city with the tech and everything. Actually two good Eagles bars that draw a lot of birds fans. For the SB they actually had to close a road (not major but still) as they threw a huge SB party in the bar and throughout the parking lot/street.

South padre Island you say🤔

I may have to check that out...

1 hour ago, Doc S. said:

When a guy hits the long ball just when you need him to removes all prior debate.

He's your hero, and that's that!

In my last house, before the second divorce, I had a Fathead of Nick Foles on the grandkid's door.  Used to say "Good morning, Nick Foles, thank you Nick Foles, I love you Nick Foles", every school day when I woke up the kid.  I miss that Nick Foles poster but not too much else from there (I see the grandkid at his games). 🤣

4 hours ago, ToastJenkins said:

Nah its become over rated

like any other combine assessment, its meant to expose deficiencies more then show positive attributes

See, that’s where I totally disagree. It’s become underrated and I think you’re falling into that trap.You gain a LOT of insight from a 40.

As a case study, take Jeremy Maclin.

He was one of the most explosive players in CFB history. Basically a home run machine capable of taking it to the house any time he touched the ball.

But his NFL role was almost the complete opposite — he was essentially a possession receiver with a finesse style. Why?

All you needed to do was look at that 4.45 forty he ran and you’d know he was never going to be a home run threat in the NFL. If he was a 4.35 guy, he’d probably be flirting with the hall of fame, because he had everything else and so many more catches he would have taken to the house.

18 minutes ago, jamiller said:

In my last house, before the second divorce, I had a Fathead of Nick Foles on the grandkid's door.  Used to say "Good morning, Nick Foles, thank you Nick Foles, I love you Nick Foles", every school day when I woke up the kid.  I miss that Nick Foles poster but not too much else from there (I see the grandkid at his games). 🤣

Embrace the obvious, screw the rest...

48 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

The holdup with Yosemite thus far has been every time I either try to package it into another trip or head there on its own, the lodging is insanely expensive and reasonable accommodations seem like hours away. Maybe I’m also looking last minute and that’s the consequence.

I keep doing the same with Yellowstone. I have it in my head I need to see the bison there but the timing never works out. As far as Yosemite I tried to go a month or so ago but they had had that giant blizzard so it was closed. Ha I was able to get into Sequoia National Park though and it was awesome. 

2 hours ago, BigEFly said:

Bend and quickness matter a lot in football.  I think 3 cone, short shuttle really matter.  We see a lot of speedsters (4.3-4.4 forties) that don’t make it because they are stiff. Or they process slowly, don’t take coaching, have bad hands, etc.  @austinfan  catches a lot of grief but he is right about how the jumps measure for DL and IL.  As one that looks at the measurables, I will say that to me, especially for defense and OL, the position drills are what catch my eye the most.  

As to 4.38 guy will be tackled by a 4.43 99% of the time and by a 4.6 S that has great instincts and good angles 95% of the time.   Football isn’t a track meet and when was the last time you saw a football player in a track stance.  But the lean and change of direction in a 3 cone or short shuttle or the flip of the hips in the DB position drill?  Those are more football oriented 

Totally disagree.

And this is why I think the 40 is now underrated by the enthusiast fan. Basically it’s trendy to think instincts overcome raw speed. This isn’t correct. If you just look at this from a probability standpoint, great instincts don’t guarantee an optimal outcome.

It’s more like great instincts make up for an athletic deficiency some additional percentage of plays over average. But the 4.35 guy is still going to erase the angle those great instincts might create on some proportion of those plays. In other words, you can read the play correctly and still get beat. And if you don’t read the play correctly you will get beat 100% of the time by the 4.35 guy while you might recover against the 4.4 guy.

2 hours ago, GoEagles614 said:

False. 

40 time has no correlation to if someone can succeed or not in the NFL. It’s a practiced, trained run from a sprinter’s stance with no pads, no context. It’s how fast can you run in a straight line, for 40 yards nothing more. Which almost never happens in the NFL outside of 1 position. It’s a spectacle to give causal viewers more entertainment. 
 

Larry Fitzgerald and Jerry Rice were slow AF and are two all-time greats. 40 shows nothing useful for DL, OL, or QB. LBer is teetering, and decently not a big deal for RB who are normally seeing contact or change of direction within 5 yards. 
 

The combine is for entertainment, or else they’d have them doing actual drills with defenders, different coverages, situational football etc. 

the 40 is absolutely useful. Again, taken in combination with game film, it is the absolute best way to judge the athleticism of a player. Good tape + good 40 = good chance of a good player.

 

That's a pretty good deal. Figured he'd have cost $4-5 mil...

1 hour ago, Eagz said:

That's a pretty good deal. Figured he'd have cost $4-5 mil...

Yeah that is a good deal especially for a competent starter.

3 hours ago, Eagz said:

That's a pretty good deal. Figured he'd have cost $4-5 mil...

He sucks that’s why it wasn’t that much

7 hours ago, mattwill said:

And if the Eagles don’t select a RB in the Draft?

Fournette

7 hours ago, Texas Eagle said:

If you think the oft-injured Penny on a 1 year 1M deal or Gainwell are starting RBs then I’m not sure I can talk any more sense into you. At best they are a committee.

I really can't believe how many think Gainwell looks like a future starter. 

9 hours ago, BigEFly said:

Not sure I agree that Edmunds and Blakenship are box Ss.  I think they are zone downfield charging Ss (which, BTW fit Morrow in college).  Evans actually was a midfielder in college but came downhill a bunch (with mixed success due to his allergy to tackling).  Blakenship actually has decent instincts and angles but lacks ideal speed.  But downhill works for him.  Edmunds has the speed but maybe not the quickness and his angles/instincts are not great. 

Everyone from Pittsburgh has labeled Edmunds as a safety that belongs in the box with minimized coverage responsibilities.  Maybe they are wrong, but that's the sense his departing team had on him.  Blankenship does seem to have the instincts, but he can't run.  And he definitely can't turn and run.

These aren't guys that excel in coverage.

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

Everyone from Pittsburgh has labeled Edmunds as a safety that belongs in the box with minimized coverage responsibilities.  Maybe they are wrong, but that's the sense his departing team had on him.  Blankenship does seem to have the instincts, but he can't run.  And he definitely can't turn and run.

These aren't guys that excel in coverage.

Blankenship runs adequately for safety.  He's a 4.4 guy. Edmonds is even faster.  Yet neither is a guy you want man to man. 

I think Blankenship has fine range in zone. Not sure about Edmonds.

 

Interestingly, Brian Branch looks much more dynamic than either of them  and is by far the slowest of the 3. I have a hard time he barely better than a 4.6 guy but he only ran 4.58 at the combine. 

5 hours ago, TEW said:

See, that’s where I totally disagree. It’s become underrated and I think you’re falling into that trap.You gain a LOT of insight from a 40.

As a case study, take Jeremy Maclin.

He was one of the most explosive players in CFB history. Basically a home run machine capable of taking it to the house any time he touched the ball.

But his NFL role was almost the complete opposite — he was essentially a possession receiver with a finesse style. Why?

All you needed to do was look at that 4.45 forty he ran and you’d know he was never going to be a home run threat in the NFL. If he was a 4.35 guy, he’d probably be flirting with the hall of fame, because he had everything else and so many more catches he would have taken to the house.

That's a perfect example.  Reagor fits into that too.  I think people get too stuck on it as a determinant of success vs. bust and then get frustrated with it as an overrated stat.  The 40 told us something about these guys that we didn't know.

There's a lot that goes into success or failure in the NFL, but this isn't golf or baseball either.  Raw athletic traits are a lot more important in this sport than in others.

If it didn't matter, there wouldn't be hundreds of scouts with stopwatches at all levels of the game.

3 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Blankenship runs adequately for safety.  He's a 4.4 guy. Edmonds is even faster.  Yet neither is a guy you want man to man. 

I think Blankenship has fine range in zone. Not sure about Edmonds.

 

Interestingly, Brian Branch looks much more dynamic than either of them  and is by far the slowest of the 3. I have a hard time he barely better than a 4.6 guy but he only ran 4.58 at the combine. 

Blankenship was a pro day 4.55, unless the interwebs is wrong.  A pro-day 4.55 is about as bad as it gets for a DB.

7 hours ago, Alphagrand said:

Wagner got a 5 year, $50M contract from the Rams last offseason, and they cut him after one year.  They ate about $8M of salary just to get rid of him.

They are the Rams though, their window is just about closed and realized it and have no need for an aged expensive middle linebacker. Wagner played well last year, if he didn't I would not be interested. We are a win now team with barely anything at LB and this guy could've helped Dean and Morrow and the younger guys. 

12 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Everyone from Pittsburgh has labeled Edmunds as a safety that belongs in the box with minimized coverage responsibilities.  Maybe they are wrong, but that's the sense his departing team had on him.  Blankenship does seem to have the instincts, but he can't run.  And he definitely can't turn and run.

These aren't guys that excel in coverage.

This is why I was hoping he wouldn't be our deep cover safety. The ones from Pitt are not the only ones that have thought that either. 

I've been musing over ways to use Gibbs.  While I do think he'd be a great addition to the offense, even at 30, I struggle to find first round value in a rotational RB who either won't be around for a second contract or who will get a second contract and will be overpaid and will peter out by the end of it.

He'd be fun to integrate into the offense, but I just don't think I could see it in round 1.  To be honest, I'd be more interested in seeing him dedicate himself as a full time WR.  That's an opportunity to play more snaps with better health.

9 hours ago, mattwill said:

Would you say that Gainwell’s performance in the playoffs was the performance of "a nice rotational back”?

Of course. I thought he was a nice rotational back long before the playoffs. But the Super Bowl he didn't do much and was abandoned if anything. 

Edmunds at 2.5M > Epps at 6. Easy decision.

9 hours ago, Original Sin said:

Evans love to hit in college , violent . He looks to tackle , did he miss too many tackles ? Yes he did , but he didn’t hide from them

I posted his highlight tape a few days back and said the same thing.  If I was watching his tape looking towards this draft I would be really excited about him.  Injuries completely derailed his career.  Can the Eagles strike gold here?  Highly doubt it but I'm looking forward to seeing what he can bring.

38 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I've been musing over ways to use Gibbs.  While I do think he'd be a great addition to the offense, even at 30, I struggle to find first round value in a rotational RB who either won't be around for a second contract or who will get a second contract and will be overpaid and will peter out by the end of it.

He'd be fun to integrate into the offense, but I just don't think I could see it in round 1.  To be honest, I'd be more interested in seeing him dedicate himself as a full time WR.  That's an opportunity to play more snaps with better health.

Wish Reggie Bush would have done that. Him as a mostly slot WR with Drew Brees would have been deadly. Obviously that’s just my perspective. Maybe it would have flopped