Jump to content

EMB Blog: 2023 Offseason - NO POLITICS


Connecticut Eagle

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Gosh, what will the eagles ever do if the packers goes from missing the playoffs to… missing the playoffs

Made the playoffs most years for the last 30. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 30.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
8 hours ago, Cochis_Calhoun said:

Hunt hasn't broken 900 yards rushing since his rookie season and hasn't broken 700 all purpose yards since 2020, there's a reason he was getting less and less snaps, and it's that Nick Chubb and D'Ernest Johnson can both maintain 5.0 yards per carry plus in a team that Hunt couldn't even beat 4 yards with last year.

No, I get what you're saying. However I think it's kind of harsh to not take at least a look into why that goes beyond statistics alone. Maybe there's a clear story shown when watching, but it's kind of rare that guys become washed with little known catalyst. A little worse if people figure them out? Sure.

Washed? That's. I mean it's not impossible but like. Holy hell that'd be rough. But I haven't watched him all that much, so maybe he's just an exception in a negative way. But god that'd be weird. Like a true and undeniable reminder of 'not for long'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

I’m not the one proposing it, 32 of the most savvy businessmen in the US are. You’re preaching to multi billionaires on your superior expertise in what they should do with their money.

 

The nfl isn’t any of those leagues, the nfl hasn’t stopped making winning decisions since the merger. If the nfl owners think it’ll be a big hit, that has a lot of weight. They’re literally the experts in the field

Dude keep dying on the hill. They are out for money not a better product. Rich people never make mistakes because of greed. I can keep telling you that you are wrong all day, Cap. There are not enough NFL caliber players for 4 more teams. There are not 200+ people sitting home good enough in 2023 without watering it down. You can say there are all day and you would continue to be full of crap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope Rodgers makes the jump to Minnesota next year and beats the Packers every time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

Yes, and I’M the childish one. :roll: Guy took some time to be nice to you undeservedly and you come back with some gif from your hidden Michael Keaton spank bank thumb drive. What a loser. 

 

Oh look another post of you quoting me where you're trying to hurl a personal insult. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I hope Rodgers makes the jump to Minnesota next year and beats the Packers every time.

That choke artist beating us lol?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, MrGreenBay said:

Made the playoffs most years for the last 30. 

You know who else used to make the playoffs a lot? The Bears. How long do you think you’ll be able to fall back on that comeback? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MrGreenBay said:

Made the playoffs most years for the last 30. 

You seem like a nice guy, but why do you think any one here gives a hoot about the packers or Rodgers???

Unless the eagles are playing the packers  or we were signing or trading for some dude from GB I think about the packers about as long as I think about what colors mixed together make brown🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

michael-keaton.gif

 

In the parable, I think this makes me the turtle and you the scorpion... Gave it a shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

Dude keep dying on the hill. They are out for money not a better product. Rich people never make mistakes because of greed. I can keep telling you that you are wrong all day, Cap. There are not enough NFL caliber players for 4 more teams. There are not 200+ people sitting home good enough in 2023 without watering it down. You can say there are all day and you would continue to be full of crap. 

Again, that’s only based on the myopic perception of what defines an nfl player today. In 1994 there were only 28 teams of nfl players, by 2002 they added 4 more teams. Same scenario, people back then said there isn’t 200 more players sitting on the couch, and now people today recognize those 200 players as nfl-level talent. That’s called relativity, no crap necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, AmericanEagle77 said:

No, I get what you're saying. However I think it's kind of harsh to not take at least a look into why that goes beyond statistics alone. Maybe there's a clear story shown when watching, but it's kind of rare that guys become washed with little known catalyst. A little worse if people figure them out? Sure.

Washed? That's. I mean it's not impossible but like. Holy hell that'd be rough. But I haven't watched him all that much, so maybe he's just an exception in a negative way. But god that'd be weird. Like a true and undeniable reminder of 'not for long'.

Maybe NFL teams figure why spend the extra money on a vet whose kind of a head case when I can spend just a little less or lot less on  a younger maybe just as good rookie?

Lot of guys still out there, I'm sure they'll get signed after the draft when teams need to fill holes, the longer they go unsigned the further their price will drop.

And maybe some of these vet guys are just biding their time, waiting for the perfect spot for them or situations where they can sign after camp. Who knows.

I love how Zeke though made a wish list of teams he'd be willing to go to, like teams are banging  down the door to sign Zeke and bid for him...😄

It's kind of astonishing how much RB has been de valued in the last few years, I mean Zeke hunt guys of that caliber are still serviceable backs 

Cut off point used to be 30 for most teams and most players not named Curtis Martin or Frank gore, now seems like 27-28 is the new 30 for RBs 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Again, that’s only based on the myopic perception of what defines an nfl player today. In 1994 there were only 28 teams of nfl players, by 2002 they added 4 more teams. Same scenario, people back then said there isn’t 200 more players sitting on the couch, and now people today recognize those 200 players as nfl-level talent. That’s called relativity, no crap necessary.

Hm. This is actually a pretty intellectual argument, I'm impressed. I'm not sure it's true, but this is a very accurate way of looking at things on paper. The extension of that, mind you, is that you don't actually need an additional 200 players of current top of NFL level talent simply because a lot of the top will be redistribution, and a lot of the additional salaries will be backups to backups.

I think part of where the buck stops though is actually of the NFL's own doing. They went out of their way to reduce the amount of feasible ways for teams to win championships - by making it revolve in a lot of ways around QB. Therefore, it adds a bottleneck to NFL competitiveness that goes through QB. Gone are the days where there were an equal amount of teams winning with good running game and defense as winning with great QBs. 

By doing that, they single handedly tied expansion validity to QB, if the goal for additional teams is parity with the rest of the league. And I'd say that's way more of a problem than finding a bunch more back of roster players for expansion teams. We can't even get 32 teams with good NFL level QB play much less 36.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another example of an older uniform looking better than the current.  Look at these beauties.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Another example of an older uniform looking better than the current.  Look at these beauties.

 

The old 1970s Pittsburgh Pirates were the best dressed baseball team I can remember.  The colors, the hats, and the stars on the hats 

 

image.jpeg.414b419963a59193e2b4529af40cc174.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AmericanEagle77 said:

Hm. This is actually a pretty intellectual argument, I'm impressed. I'm not sure it's true, but this is a very accurate way of looking at things on paper. The extension of that, mind you, is that you don't actually need an additional 200 players of current top of NFL level talent simply because a lot of the top will be redistribution, and a lot of the additional salaries will be backups to backups.

I think part of where the buck stops though is actually of the NFL's own doing. They went out of their way to reduce the amount of feasible ways for teams to win championships - by making it revolve in a lot of ways around QB. Therefore, it adds a bottleneck to NFL competitiveness that goes through QB. Gone are the days where there were an equal amount of teams winning with good running game and defense as winning with great QBs. 

By doing that, they single handedly tied expansion validity to QB, if the goal for additional teams is parity with the rest of the league. And I'd say that's way more of a problem than finding a bunch more back of roster players for expansion teams. We can't even get 32 teams with good NFL level QB play much less 36.

It bottlenecks NFL competitive in any individual year you make the observation, sure. But If you look at every team that made the divisional round this year, these were their records in 2020, just 2 years prior:

6-10

4-11-1

13-3

1-15

4-11-1

6-10

14-2

6-10

 

How many of those teams were perceived to have had top 15 QBs at that point in time, and those were the same QBs that played in the 2022 playoffs? 3 of 8? Parity is real, and it would extend to the European clubs. Maybe the number of top QBs doesn’t increase with the number of  teams, but the opportunity to succeed would be the same over time.
 

It will also increase the total of top talent in the NFL, it won’t just be the same stars spread thinner. When you think about the Tom Brady’s and the Tony Romo’s, the Kurt Warner’s and the Kirk Cousins’s, how many other QBs who could have gotten to this level in the NFL never got the opportunity? What if there were fewer teams today and Jalen Hurts was drafted to be a backup to a team with an entrenched starter? He may still be a backup today.
 

No, it won’t add 4 more pro bowl QBs every year, but extrapolated over the whole roster at every position, there will be many more stars in the nfl that wouldn’t have otherwise existed. That’s another way you can compare it to college, the top QBs spring up randomly all over the place, it’s not always the SEC, power 5 conference, or even FBS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Say the NFL expands into Europe and creates 4 new teams. I would imagine they would have an expansion type of draft so the new teams aren't starting from scratch. The scenario is every team can protect 7 offensive players, 7 defensive players, and either a punter or kicker from being drafted by an expansion team. All rookies would be exempt from being draft. Who are the current Eagles players you would protect for the expansion draft?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Utebird said:

 

A's fans are like should I pay the water bill or go to an A's game and Giants fans are like should I go out on my yacht today or go to a Giants game...🤷‍♂️

Two totally different cities and fan bases though they're only separated by a bridge.

yup....but to go from Oakland to SF it costs 7 bucks...SF to Oakland is free

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MrGreenBay said:

Made the playoffs most years for the last 30. 

Why are you here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, wussbasket said:

Say the NFL expands into Europe and creates 4 new teams. I would imagine they would have an expansion type of draft so the new teams aren't starting from scratch. The scenario is every team can protect 7 offensive players, 7 defensive players, and either a punter or kicker from being drafted by an expansion team. All rookies would be exempt from being draft. Who are the current Eagles players you would protect for the expansion draft?

How it worked with Houston and Cleveland#2 is if that player got drafted, all dead money would be removed from the original team. It was pretty awesome for dumping awful contracts, and sometimes they were legit players that expansion teams were getting just because their contracts were so bad.

So we’d let them have Darius Slay, and *Poof* all dead money and his salary gone, and we have a ton of cap space now to re-sign Hargrave and CJGJ both.

 

Devonta

Jurgens

Mailata

Dickerson

Hurts

Lane

Man this is tough, gotta be AJ. That means we likely lose Goedert. Don’t put up Kelce because he can just wait til after the draft to say he’s not retiring. 
 

Defense is way easier

 

Davis

Sweat

Williams

Reddick

Dean

Thats about it. I can’t even think of another worth protecting. They can have Barnett. I don’t know if Graham counts as he was just re-signed. Bradberry wouldn’t count. Maddox? Maddox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, wussbasket said:

Say the NFL expands into Europe and creates 4 new teams. I would imagine they would have an expansion type of draft so the new teams aren't starting from scratch. The scenario is every team can protect 7 offensive players, 7 defensive players, and either a punter or kicker from being drafted by an expansion team. All rookies would be exempt from being draft. Who are the current Eagles players you would protect for the expansion draft?

Not sure I can name 7 defensive players. 

Elliott obviously. 
 

Hurts, Smith, Mailata, Dickerson, Johnson, Brown, Goedert. 

Feels dirty to not list Kelce but it was down to him and Johnson for me, and Johnson gives a little bit more long term stability. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Not sure I can name 7 defensive players. 

Elliott obviously. 
 

Hurts, Smith, Mailata, Dickerson, Johnson, Brown, Goedert. 

Feels dirty to not list Kelce but it was down to him and Johnson for me, and Johnson gives a little bit more long term stability. 

I figured Kelce would just wait until he announced he wasn’t retiring until after the draft so we don’t need to list him.

I went Jurgens over Goedert, but that’s a tough one. Love Goedert and Jurgens is a gamble, but TE is the 22nd most important off/def position IMO, and the salary cap relief would allow us to get another halfway decent one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, pgcd3 said:

I'd argue the depth now is fine but the starters are the ?  LB is a huge question mark.  Dean never started and Morrow wasn't rated well by many anyway. The depth is non-existent really

Is the LB situation uncertainty or weakness?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...