February 22, 20232 yr 9 hours ago, NOTW said: Pay the man. Bradberry & Epps leave, start CJG & Blankenship. Draft a corner high to replace Bradberry. Secondary remains strong. This is where I’m at. I haven’t been impressed at all with Epps, and think Blankenship may be the better safety anyway.
February 22, 20232 yr 22 hours ago, time2rock said: If I had to choose between keeping Epps or CJGJ I am retaining the latter. Any comments about CJGJ having missed tackles must not have been paying much attention to Epps. Pair CJGJ up with Blankenship. I don't think you read the thread. Let's try again. Missed tackle percentage. Notice who played more games and who had more missed tackles. Now, I'm not saying keep Epps over CJGJ, and I do think Blankenship is the best of all of them, but I do have to correct what you said because that's just not correct.
February 22, 20232 yr 5 minutes ago, AmericanEagle77 said: I don't think you read the thread. Let's try again. Missed tackle percentage. Notice who played more games and who had more missed tackles. Now, I'm not saying keep Epps over CJGJ, and I do think Blankenship is the best of all of them, but I do have to correct what you said because that's just not correct. My comment was not a comparison in the tackle miss rate between CJGJ and Epps (trying to suggest Epps misses more). I was merely stating that (while CJGJ has indeed missed tackles) Epps misses his share of tackles too. Taking missed tackles out of the equation, I think CJGJ brings more to the defense and would prefer they bring him back over Epps if choosing between the 2.
February 22, 20232 yr 3 minutes ago, time2rock said: My comment was not a comparison in the tackle miss rate between CJGJ and Epps (trying to suggest Epps misses more). I was merely stating that (while CJGJ has indeed missed tackles) Epps misses his share of tackles too. Taking missed tackles out of the equation, I think CJGJ brings more to the defense and would prefer they bring him back over Epps if choosing between the 2. Put like that, yes, I agree. Mostly because while he's not actually an amazing cover S, he is ridiculously good in the slot. Giants game they bumped him down there, divisional round and he was ridiculous. Absolute difference maker. He also has good hands, which help. I don't think, however, that he's showed stuff on par as to what Blankenship has showed as a pure safety (keeping in mind smaller sample size with Ship), but he makes the top two. My main issue with the guy is he sells out for picks a bit, but my issue with Epps is that he's just flat out not good right now. Maybe he'll develop but IMO he's a backup right now.
February 22, 20232 yr On 2/20/2023 at 4:27 PM, AmericanEagle77 said: This is a huge mistake in my opinion unless they let Epps go and let Blankenship be the other safety. I said this in the blog, it's really important to look beyond the interceptions. Gardner-Johnson at safety is okay, but he doesn't tackle all that well. He also sells out for interceptions. However, he might be the best slot defender in the league when he lines up there rather than at safety, and we have two high. Completion percentage against Eagles defenders. Passer rating allowed by Eagles defenders. Missed tackle percentage by Eagles defenders. ...Don't really see why everyone has such a fascination with Gardner-Johnson, yes he gets interceptions but people would be lighting other safeties who miss that many tackles on fire. I like him as a defender, sure, particularly when you can bring him down to slot and install a third safety, but I think Blankenship is better as an S in most things than both he or Epps is, and the dude was a UDFA rookie - and the eye test gives you the same impression. He completely blows the other two away in run support for example. Someone above mentioned Dawkins with reference to CJGJ which I think is pretty silly, especially considering Tra Thomas has been quoted saying that Dawkins really approved of the play of Blankenship, not Gardner-Johnson. Maybe both can develop more, but right now the only thing that gives me pause with Blankenship is that he's younger and thus needs to show more with more playing time. I seriously doubt Epps will be back if they keep CJGJ. Epps graded much better as a part time player than a full-time starter and someone will give him low end starter pay because of his experience. I agree that people overlook some things with CJGJ because of his playmaking ability, but you do need playmakers that can light a spark on the defense. I believe Blankenship will start next season regardless.
February 22, 20232 yr On 2/21/2023 at 10:24 AM, toolg said: Good. Although it probably means Bradberry is gone. Draft someone at #10. This draft has some talented CBs.
February 23, 20232 yr 25 minutes ago, VaBeach_Eagle said: Who was the last player that we tagged? Did we tag DJAX or Vick in '12? I can't remember anyone more recent than that.
February 23, 20232 yr 58 minutes ago, Cochis_Calhoun said: Did we tag DJAX or Vick in '12? I can't remember anyone more recent than that. DJax in '12, Vick in '11. Both agreed to long term deals. They were the last players on which we used the tag.
February 23, 20232 yr Only 2 guys I'd like to have back are CGJ and Hargrave. Seumalo and Graham on team friendly deals
February 24, 20232 yr On 2/22/2023 at 6:15 PM, PhillyPhreak24 said: Draft someone at #10. This draft has some talented CBs. It does? Personally I don’t see a single CB that is worth a top 10 pick in this draft.
February 24, 20232 yr 17 hours ago, Mike030270 said: How upset would you be if Howie let CJGJ walk? I think he goes to the highest bidder no doubt. Remember the reason why the Eagles got him for next to nothing is b/c he was already disgruntled about wanting more money. I won't be that mad if it turns out Howie offered him a huge but fair contract then he walks to some loser team who breaks the bank for him.
February 24, 20232 yr 3 hours ago, nipples said: It does? Personally I don’t see a single CB that is worth a top 10 pick in this draft. I would have no issue using #10 on a CB this year. If the team has a few that they like, they could move down a few spots too.
February 24, 20232 yr 9 minutes ago, brkmsn said: I would have no issue using #10 on a CB this year. If the team has a few that they like, they could move down a few spots too. I’m not positive I want them taking a CB with their first pick, but that’s primarily because I’ve seen so many different players at that position mocked as the first one or two taken. I trust our front office to know a whole heck of a lot more than I do, but just as a fan looking at the mocks it doesn’t seem there is yet any clear consensus as to who the best one (or even necessarily best couple) is/ are. I’d rather the number ten pick be used on something more certain, but as such am also completely on board with the idea of moving down a few spots to recoup some draft capital and grabbing one. I do agree that CB is a big need, but it needs to be a real impact one taken.
February 24, 20232 yr On 2/21/2023 at 8:25 PM, NOTW said: Pay the man. Bradberry & Epps leave, start CJG & Blankenship. Draft a corner high to replace Bradberry. Secondary remains strong. I'd draft 1 CB to pair with Jobe, let Bradberry walk and trade Slay.
February 24, 20232 yr 1 minute ago, EagleVA said: I'd draft 1 CB to pair with Jobe, let Bradberry walk and trade Slay. Trading Slay would incur a dead money hit to the 2023 cap of $22.4M (unless we used a post June 1 designation in which case that drops to $8.6M). We already have more dead money than any other team.
February 24, 20232 yr 4 hours ago, time2rock said: We already have more dead money than any other team. I'm not surprised, Howie has to spend Lurie's money to hide his draft F-ups, what he's doing is totally unsustainable, just as they were trash after the SB win, if they don't have a good draft it's going to be deja vu all over again.
February 25, 20232 yr 12 hours ago, EagleVA said: I'm not surprised, Howie has to spend Lurie's money to hide his draft F-ups, what he's doing is totally unsustainable, just as they were trash after the SB win, if they don't have a good draft it's going to be deja vu all over again. Huh? I think in the last couple of years his drafts have been pretty good. Hurts, Goedert, Sweat, Sanders was good, Smith, he used picks to go get Brown, Mailata, Dickerson, we all think Jurgens is going to be good, Davis isn't a write off, Maddox, Gainwell looks a very good rotational back.
February 25, 20232 yr On 2/23/2023 at 11:34 PM, Mike030270 said: How upset would you be if Howie let CJGJ walk? 21 hours ago, mr_irie1 said: I think he goes to the highest bidder no doubt. Remember the reason why the Eagles got him for next to nothing is b/c he was already disgruntled about wanting more money. I won't be that mad if it turns out Howie offered him a huge but fair contract then he walks to some loser team who breaks the bank for him. 20 hours ago, brkmsn said: I would have no issue using #10 on a CB this year. If the team has a few that they like, they could move down a few spots too. I would like to have CGJ back but I’m not agreeing with this "sign him at any cost” narrative. I don’t see how we can afford to franchise him with our cap either. We should definitely try and sign him though. Witherspoon seems like he could be a pick at 10? Or a trade down to around 15 for Gonzalez or Porter. CB makes a lot of sense in the first.
February 25, 20232 yr 3 hours ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said: I think in the last couple of years his drafts have been pretty good. I don't.
February 25, 20232 yr On 2/24/2023 at 5:39 AM, nipples said: It does? Personally I don’t see a single CB that is worth a top 10 pick in this draft. IMO you sign CJ back to play CB and draft the best S in BRIAN BRANCH. just a thought
February 25, 20232 yr On 2/23/2023 at 2:06 PM, time2rock said: DJax in '12, Vick in '11. Both agreed to long term deals. They were the last players on which we used the tag. Doesn‘t seem the way Roseman goes about things and rightly so. I think this may be him trying to put some pressure on CJGJs Agent.
Create an account or sign in to comment