38 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Your first look at D'Andre Swift

Nah, I've seen him before.  But thanks for posting.

Lol

19 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Lol

 

 

Will never understand why they made that Bucs game this season a MNF game.

1 hour ago, bpac55 said:

Your first look at D'Andre Swift

 

 

Looking a bit overweight there 

58 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Stout and Jason Peters have impacted my thoughts on arm size a bit.  It can be compensated for more today than when you and I first started following football.  Like Castillo, Stout is very focused on hand use.  (Stout may be the most rounded OL coach I have seen in action.)  JP had a great punch. Combine that with a lightning quick kick step and a firm understanding of the set rule and he got in front of the defensive player fast.  But JP rarely engaged immediately in pass pro, where arm length can really be a factor. He anchored and punched and his punch rarely missed and was quite effective, even against speed rushers with great bend.  That combination of quickness, anchoring and violent punch compensated for his shorter arms. Driscoll has real good technique but he just struggles with anchoring and frankly, I have always suspected it was a lack of junk in the trunk.   Impossible to change arm length.  Do you believe anchoring can be developed?  Opeta, who is strong as a bull has a similar issue. 

Yes, of course anchoring can be developed. Probably better to say improved rather than developed. You may be limited in how well you can anchor by your physiology but with proper technique and weight training you can still optimize it.

One of the things that demonstrates really good technique is how you respond to a bull rush from a bigger and more powerful opponent. Here is a fantastic clip of Cam Jurgens blocking Jordan Davis. Note how Jurgens hops and resets. Davis is just too powerful for him but Cam maintains his hand positioning, knee bend, head up, body alignment. He drops anchor three times on this rep. Most OL anchor once, maybe twice in a pinch. Winston Justice managed to do it once...in a while, but never more than once.

 

7 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

 

Will never understand why the Eagles made that Bucs game this season a MNF game.

The Eagles make their own schedule? That’s news to me 

12 minutes ago, just relax said:

Yes, of course anchoring can be developed. Probably better to say improved rather than developed. You may be limited in how well you can anchor by your physiology but with proper technique and weight training you can still optimize it.

One of the things that demonstrates really good technique is how you respond to a bull rush from a bigger and more powerful opponent. Here is a fantastic clip of Cam Jurgens blocking Jordan Davis. Note how Jurgens hops and resets. Davis is just too powerful for him but Cam maintains his hand positioning, knee bend, head up, body alignment. He drops anchor three times on this rep. Most OL anchor once, maybe twice in a pinch. Winston Justice managed to do it once...in a while, but never more than once.

 

 

Good stuff.  I really think physiology hurts Driscoll in his anchor.  Technique looks good.  (For Opeta, I think it is his feet and balance.) I question if Justice could take coaching. So many things wrong with his play that should be fixable.

26 minutes ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

 

Looking a bit overweight there 

21 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

 

34 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

 

 

His nipples are protruding.  Just looks a bit fat and out of shape in that jersey.  How Zeke would look at times.

1 hour ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

 

His nipples are protruding.  Just looks a bit fat and out of shape in that jersey.  How Zeke would look at times.

1 hour ago, RememberTheKoy said:

 

 

His nipples are protruding.  Just looks a bit fat and out of shape in that jersey.  How Zeke would look at times.

 

15 minutes ago, greendestiny27 said:

The details some look for in photos of this team are taken to an unhealthy level.

5 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

It is hard to say that a team that lost the Super Bowl is better than the team that actually won it.  I think Long is trying to be magnanimous, but no real case can be made for a Super Bowl loser over a winner.  The winner was better when it really mattered.  Any other comparison is merely about who is better 'on paper', but games aren't played on paper.  Gannon's ineptitude in the second half scuttled the Eagles in this Super Bowl... and Sirianni kicking a FG in the second half, versus Pederson going for it on 4th and 1 at mid-field in the 4th quartter and going for the TD on 4th and goal at the 1 that turned into the Philly Special at the end of the first half showed the difference in mentality.  Pederson managed that game with the thought that a FG was a loss for the offense and a win for the defense.  Sirianni managed the game much more in line with a much more traditional coaching philosophy.   

Edge to Pederson, Schwartz (getting more aggressive on that last meaningful possession for the Pats) and 2017 squad for understanding the moment better than Sirianni, Gannon (milquetoast defense on that final Chiefs' drive) and the 2022 squad.

Well said.  I don’t personally agree with your bottom line, but you have laid out your logic and preferences clearly and effectively.  Some things in life are chocolate and vanilla.

Deandre Swift the day before training camp:

 

40 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Well said.  I don’t personally agree with your bottom line, but you have laid out your logic and preferences clearly and effectively.  Some things in life are chocolate and vanilla.

That's fair.  But, if Gannon had gone into the last possession the Chiefs had with the ball with some degree of aggressiveness, the Eagles get the ball back with more time on the clock, one way or the other.  That's what Schwartz said he was going to do for the Eagles back in 2017.  Meanwhile, Gannon let the team die by a thousand paper cuts.  How many times do we need to see a game come down to the team that possesses the ball last win the game before we recognize that in today's NFL, the offense not the defense wins championships. 

And it literally pains me to acknowledge that.  But that's the NFL today.  They wanted an offense oriented league, they want offense dominated endings.  That's what they've created with their new rules, and that's what the league has become.  You've got to coach the defensive side of the ball accordingly.  

6 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

It is hard to say that a team that lost the Super Bowl is better than the team that actually won it.  I think Long is trying to be magnanimous, but no real case can be made for a Super Bowl loser over a winner.  The winner was better when it really mattered.  Any other comparison is merely about who is better 'on paper', but games aren't played on paper.  Gannon's ineptitude in the second half scuttled the Eagles in this Super Bowl... and Sirianni kicking a FG in the second half, versus Pederson going for it on 4th and 1 at mid-field in the 4th quartter and going for the TD on 4th and goal at the 1 that turned into the Philly Special at the end of the first half showed the difference in mentality.  Pederson managed that game with the thought that a FG was a loss for the offense and a win for the defense.  Sirianni managed the game much more in line with a much more traditional coaching philosophy.   

Edge to Pederson, Schwartz (getting more aggressive on that last meaningful possession for the Pats) and 2017 squad for understanding the moment better than Sirianni, Gannon (milquetoast defense on that final Chiefs' drive) and the 2022 squad.

That 2017 team was just fairytale level of magic. Everything clicked and there was a sense of inevitability in my mind that they’d win. And it’s hard to argue that the team that lost is better than the team that won.

That said, there’s no doubt in my mind that the 2022 team was more talented, and I think if they played each other 100 times, the 2022 team would win 60 of them.

1 minute ago, TEW said:

That 2017 team was just fairytale level of magic. Everything clicked and there was a sense of inevitability in my mind that they’d win. And it’s hard to argue that the team that lost is better than the team that won.

That said, there’s no doubt in my mind that the 2022 team was more talented, and I think if they played each other 100 times, the 2022 team would win 60 of them.

More talented teams lose all the time.  Paper doesn't count.  The magic of the '17 team is why they'd win against the '22 team.  And frankly, the '17 team had a better coaching staff, overall.

OTAs began today and the only news offered was Cox is in attendance. beats get access on Thursday so they will bombard us that day. Not sure if any player is not in attendance at this point. Was hoping for a release at least that Ringo had signed.  PE.com does have some pictures. 

Who the f looks/talks about another man's nipples? Not a straight one

My guy Shocker just hit me up. He saw Hopkins at the airport in Philly. He's with Urlacher 

31 minutes ago, Godfather said:

Who the f looks/talks about another man's nipples? Not a straight one

It was actually two men's nipples. Zeke was apparently the gateway drug...

57 minutes ago, Godfather said:

My guy Shocker just hit me up. He saw Hopkins at the airport in Philly. He's with Urlacher 

Yo dawg I see hoppkinz at da airport yo. He be slayin here. Naw wha I meannnm 

1 hour ago, Iggles_Phan said:

More talented teams lose all the time.  Paper doesn't count.  The magic of the '17 team is why they'd win against the '22 team.  And frankly, the '17 team had a better coaching staff, overall.

Of course more talented teams lose all the time. That’s the nature of complex team sports and randomness.

But again, if the two teams played 100 times, the 2022 team would win the majority of those games.

2 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

That's fair.  But, if Gannon had gone into the last possession the Chiefs had with the ball with some degree of aggressiveness, the Eagles get the ball back with more time on the clock, one way or the other.  That's what Schwartz said he was going to do for the Eagles back in 2017.  Meanwhile, Gannon let the team die by a thousand paper cuts.  How many times do we need to see a game come down to the team that possesses the ball last win the game before we recognize that in today's NFL, the offense not the defense wins championships. 

And it literally pains me to acknowledge that.  But that's the NFL today.  They wanted an offense oriented league, they want offense dominated endings.  That's what they've created with their new rules, and that's what the league has become.  You've got to coach the defensive side of the ball accordingly.  

I agree 100% with your comments about Gannon, but two factors make 2022 a better team than 2017.

First, I tend to think of team as the players.  There is no denying the impact of coaches, but …

Second, if 2017 and 2022 played 100 times … coaches and all … I would expect 2022 to win more of those games than 2027 would.  And I would also expect a trend toward 2022 winning a higher proportion of the later games than of the earlier games.