5 hours ago, bpac55 said:

My gut says the opposite.  Trade down from 10 and then trade up from 30.  The value of trading down and getting more picks to help build the team will be greater than the player available at 10.  At 30, the Eagles can watch how the board falls and when they notice a player dropping, they use some 2024 ammo to move up and get that player.

My gut says trade down from both.

 

If anyone wants damaged goods, Trey Lance is available for open box price

2 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

 

yay more Comcast guys.

21 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Outside of San Francisco, that's probably the case for every team that loses their starting QB

Teams may get worse, but the Eagles, Cowboys, Commanders, Falcons, etc. offenses complete didn't fall of a cliff when they had to play their backup QB. Worse? Sure. 

Lamar with a good OC/weapons is a top 10 QB. 

13 hours ago, Moderator6 said:

There's also been enough lies & conspiracy theories about moderation decisions.  Enough with a handful of toxic a-holes ruining it for everyone else, the majority are happy & say it's peaceful & more enjoyable lately. The problem isn't moderation, they are the problem. 

I'll be happy to put those lies to rest and be "transparent" (again) if you still have issues. We've been transparent before and stated reasoning but then the few problem posters continue lying about it anyway. So if you want that conversation and want transparency...be careful what you ask for because things will come out you might not like. Reported posts, the insane conspiracy theories & garbage I get in my inbox, the requests to ban people you don't like, the hypocrisy in celebrating when people get suspended or banned that you don't like. You want to keep calling out the mods just be prepared. 

You fellas have a hard enough job as it is, warranting the multi-million dollar salaries you get.

I just wish people would be more appreciative of this resource.

I, for one, enjoy the work people put into their posts to inform and discuss.

I can't imagine what your Inbox must be like, hat's off and deep bows,

Thank you for your efforts...all you guys...

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

If anyone wants damaged goods, Trey Lance is available for open box price

I'm surprised by this. I would have bet the farm they would give Trey every chance to lose the job this season since they have to decide on the 5th year option next offseason.

1 minute ago, mattwill said:

My gut says trade down from both.

I suspect they pick at #10.  The current draft board looks like this to me:

1)  CJ Stroud (Panthers)

2)  Bryce Young (Texans)

3)  Will Anderson (Cards)

4)  Will Levis (Colts)

5)  Jalen Carter (Seahawks)

6)  Tyree Wilson (Lions)

7)  Christian Gonzalez (Raiders)

#8) Myles Murphy (Falcons)

9) Paris Johnson (Bears)

 

That would leave the Eagles a choice between Witherspoon, Skoronski, Van Ness, Bijan Robinson .... if a couple of wildcards like Anthony Richardson and Nolan Smith (who are NOT top 10 prospects) go off the board, then the Eagles could get a very good player at #10.

 

8 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Think we have had enough of going after one another. Thats how people already got banned.

Fair enough.

Tyrants should be exposed, tho.

1 minute ago, Doc S. said:

Fair enough.

Tyrants should be exposed, tho.

They are speaking loudly with their absence.

1 minute ago, Doc S. said:

Fair enough.

Tyrants should be exposed, tho.

I think they have been - by being given the boot

23 hours ago, pgcd3 said:

I think that's a best case scenario.  Obviously the pro personnel people in the league valued the players we lost and the players we signed very differently

2 hours ago, pallidrone said:

 

2 hours ago, The guy in France said:

Hoping for an inefficient market, why not

Part of the market inefficiency is that Eagles players are bright shiny objects because of the team’s success.  Other teams’ players not so much.

Just now, Alphagrand said:

They are speaking loudly with their absence.

Beat me to it

17 minutes ago, Doc S. said:

Once again, why protect the identity of these protagonist types? Your decorum is to be applauded but enough is enough.

Put their names out there, if you're sure, expose them for their behavior, give us a chance to have a go at them.

Transparency is a great equalizer...

It was Dumblebear

2 hours ago, ToastJenkins said:

Can we get munsons clone account banned plz? 😁

???

2 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Part of the market inefficiency is that Eagles players are bright shiny objects because of the team’s success.  Other teams’ players not so much.

I guess. No one signed Frank Clark yet. I get all the theories but the simplest answer is the players were valued correctly

9 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Teams can trade for him now for whatever they want. It doesn't have to be 2 firsts or any picks in this year. I'd think most teams would want it figured out before the draft so they can pivot if needed. 

I don't think that's entirely true.  I don't believe the rights to the tag itself are tradeable.  So a team has to sign Lamar to an offer sheet.   If a team signs Lamar to an offer sheet and the Ravens don't match, then the Ravens get that teams' next 2 first round picks.  It is not a trade.  The Ravens could agree to a different deal but why would the Ravens take less in a trade than what they get by simply not matching.  The offer sheet would be void if the Ravens didn't agree to the deal and didn't match.  

2 hours ago, rrfierce said:

I just can't see us taking a corner at 10, even if gonzalez or witherspoon is there

If a trade down isn’t possible, who else would you pick?

12 hours ago, HazletonEagle said:

PM is best. Not everyone is interested and would rather get back to football now. 

BS.  You guys have complained about the mods and decisions, continued personal drama in here for months.  Now all of a sudden you get called out and you don't want to talk publicly anymore.  Nope.  We'll have a discussion publicly.  Enough of people spreading ridiculous lies and rumors from supposed pm's.  I am thinking I will create a topic in RnR so the blog can talk football.

11 hours ago, BigEFly said:

With all due respect, if you volunteer to moderate then you must moderate and discussing OUR rules, as this is a community funded by its members, is part of that process.  @HazletonEagle has asked for a PM discussion and that is highly appropriate.  I hardly dispute the rulings that have led to a couple recent bannings.  Repeated bullying has no place here but neither does a response like yours above.  You’ll address us as you see fit.  Not the role of a moderator.  Do better and make the time to discuss with HE his concerns or maybe relinquish the role of moderator.  A discussion board where a "moderator” dictates as opposed to discusses? Think about that. You volunteered to moderate so moderate.

I am moderating.  I have gone back and forth with people via pm many times.  I have posted here publicly waaaaaaaay more than other mods to address concerns, reasoning for decisions, etc and it hasn't done any good.  People still repeat ridiculous lies and run with whatever narrative they want to make themselves look like victims and now they're doing it on YouTube and other places.  Someone who had VA's personal email address gave it out to others without his permission and shared his personal YouTube channel to harass him.  These are the type of people we're dealing with.  Grown men in their 40s doing this kind of stuff it's sad.

So no, I'm not dealing with all this drama in private messages back and forth when so many have no problem talking publicly in here endlessly for months when they want to rant about the mods... but now all of a sudden want to stick to football in here and go to pm when I call them out. 

I'm not saying I will not discuss things via pm on a case by case basis.  I have been doing that already and will continue.  In this situation a lot of people want to talk about moderation and keep posting about it in the public forums and not pm's.  So I'm going to address everyone publicly since everyone wants "transparency."

But I'll start a topic in RnR and we'll address it there.  

2 hours ago, Moderator12 said:

I manually check every registration before the account is accepted, so if I do my job correctly, nothing.  Because they are never given access to the site.

That's a lot of time and keyboarding...appreciate you for all that.

10 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

I don't think that's entirely true.  I don't believe the rights to the tag itself are tradeable.  So a team has to sign Lamar to an offer sheet.   If a team signs Lamar to an offer sheet and the Ravens don't match, then the Ravens get that teams' next 2 first round picks.  It is not a trade.  The Ravens could agree to a different deal but why would the Ravens take less in a trade than what they get by simply not matching.  The offer sheet would be void if the Ravens didn't agree to the deal and didn't match.  

Because if a team wants Lamar but doesn't want to give up two 1sts, the Ravens take the best they can get. Maybe a team wants to give 1 first and 1 player. Maybe they will go as high as 1 first and 2 seconds. There is no "offer sheet" in this scenario, it's Lamar signing the tag and then getting traded to a team who then work out a deal with him, which the groundwork would already be done before a trade like any other high profile trade. 

20 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

My post got deleted WTF - any post making fun of HE should be applauded 

It was out of line and out of respect for HE I removed it.  Don't push it.

6 minutes ago, Moderator6 said:

But I'll start a topic in RnR and we'll address it there.  

This is probably the best course of action. Give the aggrieved parties a place to vent and keep it out of the blog. 

It seems like the problem is mostly solved anyway, so now people who are still bothered by it can punch themselves out in rnr and we can all get on with our lives. 

15 minutes ago, RLC said:

Teams may get worse, but the Eagles, Cowboys, Commanders, Falcons, etc. offenses complete didn't fall of a cliff when they had to play their backup QB. Worse? Sure. 

Lamar with a good OC/weapons is a top 10 QB. 

I don’t think too many people dispute that. But to give that much guaranteed money to the 8th, 9th best QB in the league? Dak Prescott is the poster boy for why that may not be the best idea. 
 

In 2022, Dallas went 12-5, 4th seed, beat Tampa, lost to SF. What would their season be if Jimmy Garoppolo or Jared Goff were there QB at considerably lower $$$? 11-6? Maybe 10-7? Probably lose to Minshew on Christmas Eve, but the rest of the schedule was pretty straight forward. Then they play Tampa, a team that couldn’t win as many games as they lost and they win comfortably (not as much a blowout), then lose to SF again.

2021 Dallas went 12-5. Well they won the NFC by 3.5 games, a lesser QB does the same. Then they get embarrassed at home by SF again, I’m sure we could find a few QBs who could pull that off.

So what benefit has Dallas actually gotten with Dak’s huge contract? Pretty stats? Nice sleep number commercials?

You could do the same with Kyler, Carr, Wentz, Watson, Wilson, Rivers, Cousins.

Unless you’re a top 3-5 QB, is there really justification in paying you all that money? What has Baltimore done in Lamar’s era that couldn’t have been done with a different QB besides personal accolades? And now it’ll be with Lamar but minus 50m$ every year in cap space. Many all pro caliber contracts all over the field must be removed to keep him. Will that improve team success?

Darn