I don’t even think a RB needs to be taken. Looking forward to seeing Sermon work his way into the offense. 

It looks like this draft is deep on both lines. Wouldn’t be shocked if that were the first 4 picks. 2 DL, 2 OL 

1 hour ago, ToastJenkins said:

Do we run only rpo?

Of course not. But IF the play call is an RPO there is no fourth option.

The difference between an RPO and play action is that in the first instance the OL commits to run blocking. If the QB does not give it to the RB on the first option he had better throw immmediately OR keep and run. If he keeps the ball and does NOT run but instead looks for a second or third receiver, the OL is downfield and it's a penalty. On play action, the OL does not commit downfield. It shows run action but does not cross the LOS by more than a yard. In this second instance there is no illegal man downfield and the QB can go through as many reads as the blocking will allow.

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

We were ahead of the curve on butler 

 

Maybe who ever signs him can never use him then put him in for his one and only snap of the year at a really critical point of the game and throw him a pass he's never practiced once with the qb throwing him the ball ...😒

15 minutes ago, just relax said:

Of course not. But IF the play call is an RPO there is no fourth option.

The difference between an RPO and play action is that in the first instance the OL commits to run blocking. If the QB does not give it to the RB on the first option he had better throw immmediately OR keep and run. If he keeps the ball and does NOT run but instead looks for a second or third receiver, the OL is downfield and it's a penalty. On play action, the OL does not commit downfield. It shows run action but does not cross the LOS by more than a yard. In this second instance there is no illegal man downfield and the QB can go through as many reads as the blocking will allow.

I recognize all that schematically. My comment and question go more to processing and progression. What good is a slot when Hurts will pull it down and run before he get to that read?

i want a guy that can return kicks i just question the value of the slot in this offense. A second te might have higher utility no?

3 hours ago, HazletonEagle said:

If you want Gibbs, the RB at 30, just say it. No need to pretend hes going to be the new deep threat. Hes a RB who can catch passes. 

If you want a deep threat at 30, draft an actual WR- Hyatt and Mims will both likely be there and are actually WRs that are fantastic deep threats.

I mean, I’ve been very vocal that I see Gibbs as one of the few players who could significantly improve the offense. Not really hiding anything. Taking him would depend a lot on how the coaches plan to use him. In my mind, to justify it, he’d have to be a featured player in the offense and we’d probably be throwing a lot more.

I don’t see why Gibbs can’t give us a deep threat at times when used out of the slot though. He’s literally faster and twitchier than both Hyatt and Mims. The idea that a guy who runs a 4.36 who runs good routes, has good body control, and is quick as lightning making cuts can’t be a deep threat is crazy to me.

The whole argument to take him in the 30-45 range is that he IS that dynamic. That he CAN do these extraordinary things that others can’t. It doesn’t mean you send him deep every play, but the threat is there.

11 minutes ago, TEW said:

I mean, I’ve been very vocal that I see Gibbs as one of the few players who could significantly improve the offense. Not really hiding anything. Taking him would depend a lot on how the coaches plan to use him. In my mind, to justify it, he’d have to be a featured player in the offense and we’d probably be throwing a lot more.

I don’t see why Gibbs can’t give us a deep threat at times when used out of the slot though. He’s literally faster and twitchier than both Hyatt and Mims. The idea that a guy who runs a 4.36 who runs good routes, has good body control, and is quick as lightning making cuts can’t be a deep threat is crazy to me.

The whole argument to take him in the 30-45 range is that he IS that dynamic. That he CAN do these extraordinary things that others can’t. It doesn’t mean you send him deep every play, but the threat is there.

Theres a lot more to being a deep threat than running a 4.3 40 time. 

Hyatt ran 4.40 and Mims was also in the 4.3s. Theyre actually WRs who are the best deep threats in the class and can be had in the same range.

If you want to take the passing game to the next level, you can draft one of them as an improvement on Quez Watkins and have a legit 3rd WR.

Or you can draft Cedric Tillman who has #1 WR potential and would be our 3rd option.

 

If you want a RB in round 1, just say it. Id be fine with Gibbs at 30. You go overboard trying to sell the passing game stuff. He can provide Kamara like impact for our offense and be very involved in the passing game, as well as running the ball. But you keep trying to make him sound like a WR. Itd be smarter to just draft a WR if thats what you actually want.

  

Just now, HazletonEagle said:

Theres a lot more to being a deep threat than running a 4.3 40 time. 

Hyatt ran 4.40 and Mims was also in the 4.3s. Theyre actually WRs who are the best deep threats in the class and can be had in the same range.

If you want to take the passing game to the next level, you can draft one of them as an improvement on Quez Watkins and have a legit 3rd WR.

Or you can draft Cedric Tillman who has #1 WR potential and would be our 3rd option.

 

If you want a RB in round 1, just say it. Id be fine with Gibbs at 30. You go overboard trying to sell the passing game stuff. He can provide Kamara like impact for our offense and be very involved in the passing game, as well as running the ball. But you keep trying to make him sound like a WR. Itd be smarter to just draft a WR if thats what you actually want.

  

He’s a RB who can line up in the slot and run WR routes and catch like a WR. THAT is what I am after. A dynamic player with game breaking speed, elite elusiveness in the open field, and positional versatility.

I don’t just want a RB in the first. Literally I do not want Bijan. I am intrigued with the idea of Gibbs precisely because he can do more than just be a RB.

If you can’t understand this, that’s on you.

1 minute ago, TEW said:

He’s a RB who can line up in the slot and run WR routes and catch like a WR. THAT is what I am after. A dynamic player with game breaking speed, elite elusiveness in the open field, and positional versatility.

I don’t just want a RB in the first. Literally I do not want Bijan. I am intrigued with the idea of Gibbs precisely because he can do more than just be a RB.

If you can’t understand this, that’s on you.

Well then, I dont quite understand the obsession. There are always RBs who can offer those things.

Bijan is excellent in the passing game as well.

5 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Well then, I dont quite understand the obsession. There are always RBs who can offer those things.

Bijan is excellent in the passing game as well.

Yeah, totally!

There are always RBs with 4.3 speed and elite open field moves and the hands of a WR. Every team has a guy like that!

1 minute ago, TEW said:

Yeah, totally!

There are always RBs with 4.3 speed and elite open field moves and the hands of a WR. Every team has a guy like that!

There are always backs in the draft who are excellent in the passing game. Dont usually see you obsessing over them and acting like theyll actually play WR. 

40 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

I recognize all that schematically. My comment and question go more to processing and progression. What good is a slot when Hurts will pull it down and run before he get to that read?

i want a guy that can return kicks i just question the value of the slot in this offense. A second te might have higher utility no?

Let’s assume you and justrelax are right and the maximum number of options to process and progress through is three.  How does having four options improve the Offense?  The answer is pretty straightforward … the Defense does not know which of the four options (Smith, Brown, Goedert, and Gibbs) will be "off” in any play.  So they have to prepare for any and all of the four even though Hurts will only be actively considering three.  If the RB isn’t a true option, then the job of the Defense is much easier.

With that said, if Gibbs does become an Eagle I expect Howie will package Watkins in a trade.

4 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Let’s assume you and justrelax are right and the maximum number of options to process and progress through is three.  How does having four options improve the Offense?  The answer is pretty straightforward … the Defense does not know which of the four options (Smith, Brown, Goedert, and Gibbs) will be "off” in any play.  So they have to prepare for any and all of the four even though Hurts will only be actively considering three.  If the RB isn’t a true option, then the job of the Defense is much easier.

With that said, if Gibbs does become an Eagle I expect Howie will package Watkins in a trade.

Not sure Watkins has any trade value and, if he does, who lines up at WR if Brown and/or Smith miss any significant time?

30 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

There are always backs in the draft who are excellent in the passing game. Dont usually see you obsessing over them and acting like theyll actually play WR. 

Gainwell was such a back. Actually had more receiving yards than most of the guys discussed

27 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

Couldnt complain much

1 hour ago, mattwill said:

Let’s assume you and justrelax are right and the maximum number of options to process and progress through is three.  How does having four options improve the Offense?  The answer is pretty straightforward … the Defense does not know which of the four options (Smith, Brown, Goedert, and Gibbs) will be "off” in any play.  So they have to prepare for any and all of the four even though Hurts will only be actively considering three.  If the RB isn’t a true option, then the job of the Defense is much easier.

With that said, if Gibbs does become an Eagle I expect Howie will package Watkins in a trade.

Can you be just as effective with a decoy of gainwell or quez? Maybe. The rb isnt really a passing factor for us regardless

3 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

Can you be just as effective with a decoy of gainwell or quez? Maybe. The rb isnt really a passing factor for us regardless

Right, but the question is if that is by design or simply the coaches working within the limitations of their players.

 

 

What’s smaller than small ball? 

14 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

 

What’s smaller than small ball? 

As far as I'm concerned, if they don't draft Gibbs then the draft is a total failure.  

NFL team mascots reimagined as supervillains 

 

Disclaimer: Very cool, sometimes a bit repetitive. But before you get your hopes up, the bird mascots are probably some of the weakest, and ours is probably the weakest of those

42 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

 

What’s smaller than small ball? 

This is why baseball deserves love.  Goofy crap like this.  

3 hours ago, Alphagrand said:

Not sure Watkins has any trade value and, if he does, who lines up at WR if Brown and/or Smith miss any significant time?

Allen

1 hour ago, ToastJenkins said:

Can you be just as effective with a decoy of gainwell or quez? Maybe. The rb isnt really a passing factor for us regardless

If your last sentence continues to be true, then @TEW’s whole premise is out the window.  As an investment prospectus says "past performance does not guarantee future events.”

1 hour ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

NFL team mascots reimagined as supervillains 

 

Disclaimer: Very cool, sometimes a bit repetitive. But before you get your hopes up, the bird mascots are probably some of the weakest, and ours is probably the weakest of those

RTK should have filed a copyright