Bigboy10182000
Footballguy
He destroyed Gifford on that hit. Rewatch it and just look at Franks legs. Chuck crushed him.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
*Official 2015 Philadelphia Eagles* - Winning when it doesnt count (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Insein
- Start date
Bigboy10182000
Footballguy
Long Ball Larry
Footballguy
what are we talking about? Lurie?
Bigboy10182000
Footballguy
I assumed so...
Long Ball Larry
Footballguy
oops, didn't notice title change.
Bigboy10182000
Footballguy
I turned on the radio on my way to the Dr and we're back to Chip being a racist.
Deamon
Footballguy
Really? I thought that was last week. Guess it's been a pretty slow week for Eagles news, they gotta dig for something.
Ash
Footballguy
I've been thinking about the Bradford and Murray moves in particular lately as these are the ones I don't like. Both are high risk, swing for the fences type moves that, particularly in Murray's case, aren't likely to pay off relative to the investment made. It would actually have made more sense $$ wise to keep McCoy, his salary went down after this year and nothing was guaranteed. I don't have a problem with Murray as a player but I don't see how he does better than McCoy, but he will do different. That's why I don't like it much, just seems to be about style rather than results. Somehow because he's a "one cut" guy he's worth all this $$ that McCoy wasn't even though it's hard to see Murray achieving more than McCoy did. I think it's unlikely Murray plays up to this contract.LOL. Why even hire Chip if you don't believe in his approach. Trestman would have done a fantastic job with the guys Andy left us with.
On the Bradford deal, there's no argument he's physically more talented than Foles, and they each had a year left on their deal. If Kelly thinks Bradford's salary and injury risk is worth it given the physical talent advantage then OK, but look at our last four 2nd round picks; Matthews, Ertz, Curry and Kendricks. We gave up a chance at that level player and Foles for what might be only one year of Sam Bradford, whether he plays well or not.
I assume they've talked about extending him, but how do you agree on a value for a player with his high ceiling, but major risk factors? What if he plays great for all 16 games? Given how many QB needy teams there are he could probably name his price on the open market unless we franchise him. If he's just OK, or misses 4 games to injury what then? Maclin showed us that even with a player who likes it here and wants to stay, anything can happen once they hit the market. Unless he outright sucks or misses more than half the year to injury, I think Bradford has all the leverage and I don't like that. IMO, some kind of extension, even 2 or 3 years with lots of incentives should have been part of the deal if we were giving a 2nd rounder. There's every chance he could be signed with someone else by the time the Rams are making that pick next year.
All that said though, you can't give Kelly the job and then tell him how to do it. I've always believed you have to let him do what he thinks he needs to do and then judge the results. Committing only half way is almost guaranteed not to work. It's made things interesting, I'll say that.
Deamon
Footballguy
Good insight as always. I'm not sure I agree on Mccoy though. Style is important, and Kelly obviously prefers Murray to Mccoy. I think the chance is very small that Mccoy would be as productive (I hope that "productive" guy doesn't read this) as Murray and Mathews combined. I think we can use Murray a lot less then we would have used Mccoy. I think Kelly really really wants to run the ball 500-600 times. Would that have been possible with Mccoy+Polk? Probably not. But with Murray+Mathews+Polk it's more realistic. In this sense, I think the RB's have improved for the kind of offense he wants to run: One cut, Tons of carries, and often out of shotgun.I've been thinking about the Bradford and Murray moves in particular lately as these are the ones I don't like. Both are high risk, swing for the fences type moves that, particularly in Murray's case, aren't likely to pay off relative to the investment made. It would actually have made more sense $$ wise to keep McCoy, his salary went down after this year and nothing was guaranteed. I don't have a problem with Murray as a player but I don't see how he does better than McCoy, but he will do different. That's why I don't like it much, just seems to be about style rather than results. Somehow because he's a "one cut" guy he's worth all this $$ that McCoy wasn't even though it's hard to see Murray achieving more than McCoy did. I think it's unlikely Murray plays up to this contract.LOL. Why even hire Chip if you don't believe in his approach. Trestman would have done a fantastic job with the guys Andy left us with.
On the Bradford deal, there's no argument he's physically more talented than Foles, and they each had a year left on their deal. If Kelly thinks Bradford's salary and injury risk is worth it given the physical talent advantage then OK, but look at our last four 2nd round picks; Matthews, Ertz, Curry and Kendricks. We gave up a chance at that level player and Foles for what might be only one year of Sam Bradford, whether he plays well or not.
I assume they've talked about extending him, but how do you agree on a value for a player with his high ceiling, but major risk factors? What if he plays great for all 16 games? Given how many QB needy teams there are he could probably name his price on the open market unless we franchise him. If he's just OK, or misses 4 games to injury what then? Maclin showed us that even with a player who likes it here and wants to stay, anything can happen once they hit the market. Unless he outright sucks or misses more than half the year to injury, I think Bradford has all the leverage and I don't like that. IMO, some kind of extension, even 2 or 3 years with lots of incentives should have been part of the deal if we were giving a 2nd rounder. There's every chance he could be signed with someone else by the time the Rams are making that pick next year.
All that said though, you can't give Kelly the job and then tell him how to do it. I've always believed you have to let him do what he thinks he needs to do and then judge the results. Committing only half way is almost guaranteed not to work. It's made things interesting, I'll say that.
As for Bradford, I've warmed up to it a lot. Sounds like Foles wasn't the guy as of late October last year. Big risk for sure, but why would we want a guy that our coach doesn't like? Seems like that would hold us back. I wish he liked Foles but clearly he doesn't. Foles wasn't getting an extension that much is sure. So he either plays good and bolts for more money (or costs us a ton to keep), or sucks and we wasted a year by playing it safe. I agree, the 2nd rounder in return is what is really pissing me off. I wonder how those conversations went and if we could have gotten away with it being a 3rd instead.
Like you said, we need to hand him the reigns to this thing and see what happens. If Kelly felt held back with Mccoy and Foles, then I can't wait to see what he unleashes with his guys. If it blows up, then it shows he never would have brought us a title anyways and he'll be gone and it's no big deal. He wasn't going to win us a title with his offense and the current team from last year, that much is for sure.
mike303
Footballguy
I really think you will see the Eagles extend Bradford after the draft. I think they will wait just in case Mariota falls to say 10 or beyond (he absolutely won't) and he becomes possible in some dream scenario for them.
Another point that no one has brought up... Foles was never Kelly's guy. Foles was beaten out decisively by Mike Vick in camp. Foles was forced into action and once he went 27-2 Chip HAD to keep him. I bet that Foles' unexpected success altered Chip's plans greatly. He didn't believe Foles was the guy who could run his offense the way he wanted but he had to go with him or the media (and maybe even Lurie) would have crushed him on the heels of 27-2. Kelly probably knew his success was fluky and unlikely to continue. I'm not saying Foles isn't a talent, just not quite good enough to win a championship in Kelly's system.
Another point that no one has brought up... Foles was never Kelly's guy. Foles was beaten out decisively by Mike Vick in camp. Foles was forced into action and once he went 27-2 Chip HAD to keep him. I bet that Foles' unexpected success altered Chip's plans greatly. He didn't believe Foles was the guy who could run his offense the way he wanted but he had to go with him or the media (and maybe even Lurie) would have crushed him on the heels of 27-2. Kelly probably knew his success was fluky and unlikely to continue. I'm not saying Foles isn't a talent, just not quite good enough to win a championship in Kelly's system.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
If Bradford stays healthy, he's worth a 2nd round pick. If he gets injured or doesn't play you get a 3rd back from STL so you slide maybe 15-20 spots next year. Not that big a deal for a shot at a franchise QB. For whatever reason, Kelly didn't really like Foles and Foles wasn't coming back after this season. As to your question what if he plays well question, the Eagles learned their lesson with Maclin, Bradford would be franchised.I've been thinking about the Bradford and Murray moves in particular lately as these are the ones I don't like. Both are high risk, swing for the fences type moves that, particularly in Murray's case, aren't likely to pay off relative to the investment made. It would actually have made more sense $$ wise to keep McCoy, his salary went down after this year and nothing was guaranteed. I don't have a problem with Murray as a player but I don't see how he does better than McCoy, but he will do different. That's why I don't like it much, just seems to be about style rather than results. Somehow because he's a "one cut" guy he's worth all this $$ that McCoy wasn't even though it's hard to see Murray achieving more than McCoy did. I think it's unlikely Murray plays up to this contract.LOL. Why even hire Chip if you don't believe in his approach. Trestman would have done a fantastic job with the guys Andy left us with.
On the Bradford deal, there's no argument he's physically more talented than Foles, and they each had a year left on their deal. If Kelly thinks Bradford's salary and injury risk is worth it given the physical talent advantage then OK, but look at our last four 2nd round picks; Matthews, Ertz, Curry and Kendricks. We gave up a chance at that level player and Foles for what might be only one year of Sam Bradford, whether he plays well or not.
I assume they've talked about extending him, but how do you agree on a value for a player with his high ceiling, but major risk factors? What if he plays great for all 16 games? Given how many QB needy teams there are he could probably name his price on the open market unless we franchise him. If he's just OK, or misses 4 games to injury what then? Maclin showed us that even with a player who likes it here and wants to stay, anything can happen once they hit the market. Unless he outright sucks or misses more than half the year to injury, I think Bradford has all the leverage and I don't like that. IMO, some kind of extension, even 2 or 3 years with lots of incentives should have been part of the deal if we were giving a 2nd rounder. There's every chance he could be signed with someone else by the time the Rams are making that pick next year.
All that said though, you can't give Kelly the job and then tell him how to do it. I've always believed you have to let him do what he thinks he needs to do and then judge the results. Committing only half way is almost guaranteed not to work. It's made things interesting, I'll say that.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Bolded is not true. The battle for starter was as close as could be. The difference that year was pre-season redzone production. Vick was slightly better in the games, but Foles was really good that preseason.
Ash
Footballguy
I think the Eagles will try to extend him, but why would Bradford want to do that now? It's in his interest to play the season out and play well which I'm sure he believes he can do, and maximize his value and leverage the prospect of free agency before he signs a new deal. The Eagles will want to "buy low" now, Bradford will want to "sell high" after a strong and healthy season. Is there a middle ground? Not sure...mike303 said:
Ash
Footballguy
If Bradford stays healthy, and stays here, he's worth a 2nd round pick. Trading that pick for what might only be one year is what I have a problem with.
Ash
Footballguy
Does anyone know the definition of "gets injured" in this contract?If Bradford stays healthy, he's worth a 2nd round pick. If he gets injured or doesn't play you get a 3rd back from STL so you slide maybe 15-20 spots next year. Not that big a deal for a shot at a franchise QB. For whatever reason, Kelly didn't really like Foles and Foles wasn't coming back after this season. As to your question what if he plays well question, the Eagles learned their lesson with Maclin, Bradford would be franchised.I've been thinking about the Bradford and Murray moves in particular lately as these are the ones I don't like. Both are high risk, swing for the fences type moves that, particularly in Murray's case, aren't likely to pay off relative to the investment made. It would actually have made more sense $$ wise to keep McCoy, his salary went down after this year and nothing was guaranteed. I don't have a problem with Murray as a player but I don't see how he does better than McCoy, but he will do different. That's why I don't like it much, just seems to be about style rather than results. Somehow because he's a "one cut" guy he's worth all this $$ that McCoy wasn't even though it's hard to see Murray achieving more than McCoy did. I think it's unlikely Murray plays up to this contract.LOL. Why even hire Chip if you don't believe in his approach. Trestman would have done a fantastic job with the guys Andy left us with.
On the Bradford deal, there's no argument he's physically more talented than Foles, and they each had a year left on their deal. If Kelly thinks Bradford's salary and injury risk is worth it given the physical talent advantage then OK, but look at our last four 2nd round picks; Matthews, Ertz, Curry and Kendricks. We gave up a chance at that level player and Foles for what might be only one year of Sam Bradford, whether he plays well or not.
I assume they've talked about extending him, but how do you agree on a value for a player with his high ceiling, but major risk factors? What if he plays great for all 16 games? Given how many QB needy teams there are he could probably name his price on the open market unless we franchise him. If he's just OK, or misses 4 games to injury what then? Maclin showed us that even with a player who likes it here and wants to stay, anything can happen once they hit the market. Unless he outright sucks or misses more than half the year to injury, I think Bradford has all the leverage and I don't like that. IMO, some kind of extension, even 2 or 3 years with lots of incentives should have been part of the deal if we were giving a 2nd rounder. There's every chance he could be signed with someone else by the time the Rams are making that pick next year.
All that said though, you can't give Kelly the job and then tell him how to do it. I've always believed you have to let him do what he thinks he needs to do and then judge the results. Committing only half way is almost guaranteed not to work. It's made things interesting, I'll say that.
Ash
Footballguy
Given how the S position looks right now, I think my 3 CB single S package against "11" personnel is a brilliant idea and I need to send it in to Billy Davis immediately. When it comes to secondary scheming he obviously would take all the ideas he can get.
Does anyone have his email?
Does anyone have his email?
Bigboy10182000
Footballguy
Deamon
Footballguy
I think given his injury history, he'd be pretty damn happy with a multi year contract with guaranteed money. If he sucks this year, or gets injured again, he may not make much ever again. It's one thing to bet on yourself, but taking pretty close to as much guaranteed money as you're going to be offered over the next few years, is likely on his mind. His value is surprisingly high right now, he should cash in.
Ash
Footballguy
He's already pocketed something like $50m from the Rams. He's not in the position he has to take the first offer he gets. I hope you're right, but I don't think you are. Given his injury history I think his open market value would be at it's lowest point right now. An above average, healthy season only increases it. A great healthy season would make him by far the most valuable QB option on the market next offseason.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
unckeyherb
Footballguy
Snotbubbles said:
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
unckeyherb
Footballguy
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Okay.Snotbubbles said:
Bradford already counts 13M against the cap. If he stays healthy and has the type of year where he shows he's a #1 QB and you want to bring him back, another 5 or 6 shouldn't matter. It gives you more time to hammer out a long-term deal.
Bigboy10182000
Footballguy
Good thing none of us are footing the bill.
If he's the franchise QB they're looking for Hes getting tagged or a long term deal.
Ash
Footballguy
If he plays like a Top 10 QB, then tag away. That's what those guys get paid.Okay.Snotbubbles said:
It's not about who pays the bills, it's about having $ to buy other toys.
unckeyherb
Footballguy
$31,000,000 for two years of Sam Bradford should make anyone break into a cold sweat.
fred_1_15301
Footballguy
ID be awfully worried paying that much money and committing that much cap space to a QB who has only been able to play 16 games twice out of his 5 years. at this point Bradford isn't a franchise QB. But you've got a year to figure that out.
GoBirds
Footballguy
Seriously, and he was the last year of the monster guaranteed contracts. Dude is loaded and has done nothing.
Why would it cause anyone to break into a cold sweat? The only way he gets that $18 million for year 2 is if he has a very productive year 1 and stays healthy. At that point he was worth the $13 in year 1. At this point I think as Eagle fans we should be happy if he ends up getting $31 million for 2 years. No cold sweat here.
Insein
Footballguy
I don't think they'll go OL in the first but I'd be fine with anyone as long as they contribute.
eddietoca
Footballguy
I'm waiting for more information on defensive back Eric Rowe, but I can confirm something that I've been told over the past few weeks; Rowe is flying up draft boards and most feel there's no way he gets out of the second round. I'm told the Philadelphia Eagles are very high on Rowe, who's drawing intrigue based on his size/speed and ability to line-up at either cornerback or safety.
My take is the Eagles take Utah's Rowe anywhere from 20-26
My take is the Eagles take Utah's Rowe anywhere from 20-26
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
mike303
Footballguy
I'm also starting to worry about Billy Davis' scheme. It's quite alarming that Bradley Fletcher and Cary Williams were signed by New England and Seattle. Obviously, Belichick and Carroll feel like those guys can still play. I'm beginning to worry that Davis' scheme leaves CBs alone too often and that Maxwell and anyone else they throw out there will have similar results. I didn't think their performance was quite as bad as the rest of the Philly media did. They seemed to be alone on stud WRs more than anyone in football. How many corners can cover Dez without safety help on 85% of their snaps? Are there two, maybe three in the game?
They haven't done anything to fill Nate Allen's spot. The draft looks poor for safeties. The Alabama kid is the only one worthy of a first round grade and he doesn't appear to have the coverage skills necessary to play in Davis' defense. I don't watch much college but they're saying he's more of a down-hill run stuffer then a center fielder. I can envision ways to fill the holes at G and WR in the draft but what is their plan at S?
They haven't done anything to fill Nate Allen's spot. The draft looks poor for safeties. The Alabama kid is the only one worthy of a first round grade and he doesn't appear to have the coverage skills necessary to play in Davis' defense. I don't watch much college but they're saying he's more of a down-hill run stuffer then a center fielder. I can envision ways to fill the holes at G and WR in the draft but what is their plan at S?
Ash
Footballguy
Ryans was struggling to cover anything more than a short zone in the middle of the field last year, before the Achilles injury. He can't stay with RBs or TEs in man and he can't get to the flat. I assumed he was gone when they traded Shady for Kiko, but now Chip says he's definitely coming back. Hopefully that's on a reduced salary but also makes me worried Kendricks is trade bait this year or allowed to leave at the end of the season.
Edit, because it sounded like I'm hating on DeMeco. He's still a great run defender, albeit in a short area and he's good at disrupting crossing routes etc in zone. He's just losing mobility and now he's coming back from an injury which probably has accelerated that.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ash
Footballguy
Big talent difference between the Eagles on those teams in the defensive backfield. Jenkins is clearly the best player there and he's a great scheme fit but only an above average player, no more than that. Cary is a serviceable #2 corner who was asked to be #1 and Fletcher had a decent 2013 but went off a cliff last year. My theory on Nate Allen is that he's a decent athlete with questionable football intelligence. He doesn't make early reads and get to the right place, takes bad angles etc. When he found himself in the right spot, he could make a play but just wasn't there often enough. He might have looked better his rookie year playing for McDermott because the scheme was more aggressive.
To play Cover 3 or press man on the outside, you just need better talent there overall. Since 2002 when they drafted Sheppard, Brown and Lewis the only CB the Eagles have drafted in the 3rd round or higher is Curtis Marsh. Where we are now in having to overpay for Maxwell is the price you pay for neglecting that position in the draft for so long. It's one of those positions, like pass rusher, where success strongly correlates to athletic measurables and therefore draft position. Richard Sherman type late round success stories are a rarity.
The scheme is fine, but Davis did a poor job last year of making adjustments during the season when it became obvious to everybody including our opponents, that the players we had just weren't capable of executing the assignments they were being given.
Similar threads
