And if the Eagles somehow beat the Bucs, they would play the Packers whose rushing yards per attempt against ranked 30th in the league at 4.7 yards per attempt. But we need to beat the Bucs first.One thing to note about the Bucs is they have allowed the 3rd fewest rushing yards in the league. However, that is due to the fact that they lead the league in fewest rushing attempts against them. Their rushing yards per attempt against is 4.3 which ranks 15th. Obviously teams shy away from running the ball against the Bucs either because they don't think they will be able to or they have fallen behind and given up on the run.
The Eagles need to stick with their running game and give their running backs more than 9 carries.
We didn't really have a ton of choice this past year. Yea, it was due to the cap choices made from previous years, but the cap going DOWN, combined with moving on from Wentz - as I recall it was this or having to move on from so many players we would have made Jax look like a team of probowlers.Yeah, I have been beating the drum for years that Howie is overrated in his cap management. His "magic" is usually just delaying a bill coming due in future years when the cap goes up. Constantly banking on future cap increases to sign/keep players today basically puts you in treading water territory at best, and a cap mess that disastrously catches up with you (e.g. NYG), at worst.
In a previous post above it was mentioned the Colts will have $50 mil next year in cap space. We'll never see a future year like that. Even if we go total "blow it up and rebuild" it would still take a few years for the cap to reflect it because of the pushing/restructuring we do to free up current cap, when needed. We'll still be paying $15 mil for Alshon and Malik Jackson NEXT year!
17 of the 32 teams are projected to have ~$30 mil or more in cap space next years, as of now before any 2022 maneuvering. And that includes powerhouses like KC ($30 mil) and TB ($39 mil) and up-and-coming rosters like CIN ($60 mil) and LAC ($73 mil).
We've got $13 mil and look to be able to squeeze another $8-$9 mil from expected cuts and possible trades. It's a strategy that's kept us afloat, yes, but it has big risks and downsides that haven't (yet) caught up to us.
I'm not sure of this (may go back and look later), but my overall point is that Carson wasn't as bad this year as people are saying, and was definitely an above average starter. That being said, he's not top 10 and he choked when it mattered. I just think the talks of cutting him are a bit crazy is all.What would you say was the top game this year he put the Colts team on his back and led them to a win?
oopsIn more good news for us, apparently the Giants are not firing Joe Judge.
Dam... they just did.In more good news for us, apparently the Giants are not firing Joe Judge.
I'm not sure of this (may go back and look later), but my overall point is that Carson wasn't as bad this year as people are saying, and was definitely an above average starter. That being said, he's not top 10 and he choked when it mattered. I just think the talks of cutting him are a bit crazy is all.
Cousins, Carr and Garoppolo had similar or better numbers than Wentz this year and may not be starting for their teams next year either. It's very difficult to be stuck in the middle paying a top 15ish QB $25+ million a year.
I know I'm no NFL coach but I like to play one anyways.
For us we need to be patient with long drives on offense. TB will focus on making Hurts throw. We may have to get creative with manufacturing run yards. Unfortunately we need Reagor to step up and be a part of this offense. I fully expect TB to try and take Smith/Goedert out of our game plan. Maybe Watkins will blow it up. But at the end of the day our bread and butter is the o-line. I would cram it down their throat. We may get off to a slow start but cannot abandon the run.
Defensively, I would play these guys straight up. Tom has to manage Gronk or he will fatigue out. Evans and Perriman should be our focus. I feel like we'll handle the run game just fine. IMO I bet we play that cover 2 shell most of the game. Keep everything in front with the occasional blitz.
Well Williams will be cheaper now
Cox should've been traded at the deadline honestly or during the offseason prior to the season. I already said I'd trade Dillard if I can get a draft pick this year depending where it is and 2M saved is still something for a team like the Eagles. I'm hoping someone like Carolina gets desperate and wants younger cheaper T (He's 26) instead of looking at the FA market. I think Carolina could be targeting a QB like Malik Davis (who'd fit their scheme) and pair him with a guy like Dillard watching his blind side makes a ton of sense. Not a Davis fan at all but thinking what Carolina might do and the fact they also need a LT just makes sense here.We might trade Dillard just for the 2 mil cap savings
I would not hate spending our last first round pick on himYep confirmed ACL tear. Dam shame for him. I would still go after him but not sure where I'd draft him. I'm in take BPA in needs and don't reach. Depending what other draft capital Howie can manage to rob I'd say depending how far Williams drops and he's there at a spot you take him. First round talent who dropped because of injury, team still in rebuild mode with another need at WR, etc it's a good move. This is completely different then the Sid Jones situation. Never thought Jones was that good nor did he fit our scheme and we needed guys who could impact the roster right away and not wait around and hope on.
I'd have loved him in the first round if he was there but I'd like to see how far he drops now. If we can get him and he gets 100% healthy it's great draft value and a steal.
Thinking about Ronde Barber and 2002 makes me hate the Bucs. F them, lets kick their ###.
Here's a good write-up on the specifics around this decision. It's really not too bad for the Colts if they moved on (other than, you know, being left without a starting QB), which was one of the selling points in getting them to take him from us in the first place:
2022 is the final year of the deal containing guaranteed money. As of today, the Colts are on the hook for $15 million of Wentz’s 2022 compensation. Also important is the additional $7 million in 2022 salary that becomes guaranteed as of March 19. That’s also when Wentz is due a roster bonus of $6.29 million.
So should Wentz’s contract be terminated before March 19, the Colts would have to absorb $15 million in dead money on their salary cap but would not be responsible for the other sums. That’s still a significant figure for a player not on your roster. And eating dead money on the salary cap is something general manager Chris Ballard has gone to great lengths to avoid.
Still, the Colts are already scheduled to have more than $50 million in available cap space entering the spring and could, theoretically, stomach the cap charge after parting with Wentz. In fact, parting with Wentz would actually carve out an additional $13 million in cap space for Indianapolis because of the savings on the remainder of his 2022 compensation. The Colts would be in a very strong salary-cap position if you’re willing to look past the glaring fact that they’d lack a starting quarterback.
Though there is likely a minimal trade market for Wentz after consecutive seasons that produced questions, the Colts would owe nothing if he is traded by March 19. If Wentz remains with the Colts, his cap number for 2022 would be $28.294 million.
Wentz could be released with no obligation after next season.
Had to live through that last Vet game while down here in Florida with the wife's family full of TB fans. It was absolutely miserable. You're right F em!Thinking about Ronde Barber and 2002 makes me hate the Bucs. F them, lets kick their ###.
One thing to note about the Bucs is they have allowed the 3rd fewest rushing yards in the league. However, that is due to the fact that they lead the league in fewest rushing attempts against them. Their rushing yards per attempt against is 4.3 which ranks 15th. Obviously teams shy away from running the ball against the Bucs either because they don't think they will be able to or they have fallen behind and given up on the run.
The Eagles need to stick with their running game and give their running backs more than 9 carries.
Oh well. Can't keep the Judges of the world around forever.
Even Baldy wants us to run the damn ball...
https://twitter.com/BaldyNFL/status/1480962979172601858
Injury update: Richard Sherman to IR.
Thinking about Ronde Barber and 2002 makes me hate the Bucs. F them, lets kick their ###.
I would not hate spending our last first round pick on him
Had to live through that last Vet game while down here in Florida with the wife's family full of TB fans. It was absolutely miserable. You're right F em!
Lol they signed Richard Sherman because their 3 starting corners were all hurt and then #4 went down. That’s why Sherman had to play that Pats game - they weren’t planning to play him that week.Thats because their pass Defense is bottom 5 in the NFL. For as good of a DLINE and LBS they have their secondary is questionable. It's why they were signing an over the hill Richard Sherman. So teams go to pass on them. Indy did this to them and were winning. Colts were winning I think 21-7 or something and Wentz had almost 200 yds and 3TDs that game before Taylor was over 50 yards rushing. It's why I'm generally concerned about Hurts because he only managed 115 yds the whole game and most of that came vs Prevent defense late in the game garbage time. That game for Indy was another game they lost do to the Reich not being aggressive enough. Wentz also had a dumb throw leading to a pick but the way Reich managed that 2nd half they were gonna lose anyway.
Where in the post you quoted did I blame Wentz for the whole Colts collapse?Cousin's never should've gotten that sort of money. Minny signed him to that contract after a cinderella type season prior where they got bounced in the NFC Title game by the Eagles. For months I remember saying I wasn't a believer in MiNN and their magic would run out. Cousin's isn't horrible but he never should've made that amount
I like Jimmy G in the right situation. Was a big fan coming out and thought NE had their guy for Brady. Obviously Brady felt he was good enough too since he cried to Kraft to tell BB to get rid of him. However he's a game manager
I really sick and tired of the disrespect people give Carr. I may have heard this wrong but guess which NFL QB has the most GW Drives and 4thQTR comebacks in the NFL in the last 2 1/2 seasons? Not Tom Brady but Derrick Carr. I'd take Carr on the Eagles now if LV wanted to trade Carr for Hurts and I'd certainly take him over Lamar Jackson and a ton of others.
As for Carson in 2019 with a practice squad by his side he threw for over 4K and 25+ TDs and only 7 picks. I know people love to right now say well if Wentz was on the Eagles they don't win as many games this year as they did with Hurts and such. I think that's being lazy but if you were to ask me if Hurts could've done what Wentz did in 2019 and would we make the playoffs I'd say no. I don't know many QBs who could. You're right Carson has to play better but I think people are going by recent bias of the last few games this year and forgetting what Carson has done in the past as well. Also a lot of people commenting who barely watched the Colts this year and just regurgitating the hot takes by media members. Outside of Wentz the Colts had a ton of problems.
* I'll go with the biggest concern first that was there even prior to Wentz their OL. Their best OL Quinton Nelson was lost for the first few games of the season prior to a game being played and their other top Guy got hurt in Camp. Indy didn't do anything to address the needs on the O-line all offseason and into the season either upgrades at positions or addressing depth
* Going into the Baltimore game they had lost some guys in their secondary. Most of those guys ended up being season ending or missing huge amounts of time. Their defense for as good as it was eventually let them down especially the last Tenn game
* Frank Reich lack of aggressiveness. He literally cost them the Bal game where Lamar went off in the 2nd Half. Don't remember if I posted in here or the game thread watching that game I said something Reich is taking his foot off the jugular when he should be going for a kill shot here this could be costly. Sure enough they lost the game. Baltimore won a lot of games this year they shouldn't have do to poor coaching from other teams. There were other games that Reich wasn't aggressive at all or stopped being aggressive that lost them the game
* I watched a replay of the Colts game Today after work. No one showed up for the game on Sunday. It was pretty embarrassing from coaching to the players. Not just one person at fault total team effort
* Also outside of Pittman the receivers on that Roster are meh at best. THey lost Paris Campbell their other young Wr who has been inconsistent for half the season too. Sunday was his first game since Week 7. Wentz is throwing to guys like Zach Pascal and an over the hill injury prone TY Hilton.
Yes you're right Carson should play better for what he's paid but to blame Carson for the whole collapse is disingenuous and either shows laziness, biased or people who didn't get the whole picture because they didn't see the games. I'll admit I didn't watch every colts game, however I did pay attention to what people who covered the colts and fans were saying prior to the season about certain things they were concerned about and did watch enough games to get a general idea of the entire situation.
Where in the post you quoted did I blame Wentz for the whole Colts collapse?
Those 2 terrible turnovers sure did not help though. The INT, the only people that had a shot were the 2 defenders. We got the 16th pick for this!!Just watched the Indy-Jax game rewind. Wentz wasn't the only problem, by a long shot. The whole team really #### the bed. Paris Campbell had TWO terrible drops on passes that really hurt drives. That coupled with the OL/defense issues lands this squarely on the team and Reich, and not so much ONLY Wentz.
I'm going to go ahead & say the same thing about the Eagles that I did about the Steelers: they don't deserve to be in the playoffs this year. If it wasn't for the fact that the schedule went to 17 games and not keep it at 16 games, the Saints wouldn't have gotten screwed out of a playoff berth. And I'll explain what I'm talking about:
The Eagles would've been 8-8 if the league didn't add the game against the Jets and the Saints would've been 9-7 and made the playoffs as the #6 seed while dropping the 49ers to the #7 seed. In other words, the Eagles would've been out of the playoffs completely if it hadn't been for the 17-game schedule. I explained the whole thing in the 16-game argument thread that I started recently. I hope the Eagles are going to get blown out by the Buccaneers this weekend.
I'm going to go ahead & say the same thing about the Eagles that I did about the Steelers: they don't deserve to be in the playoffs this year. If it wasn't for the fact that the schedule went to 17 games and not keep it at 16 games, the Saints wouldn't have gotten screwed out of a playoff berth. And I'll explain what I'm talking about:
The Eagles would've been 8-8 if the league didn't add the game against the Jets and the Saints would've been 9-7 and made the playoffs as the #6 seed while dropping the 49ers to the #7 seed. In other words, the Eagles would've been out of the playoffs completely if it hadn't been for the 17-game schedule. I explained the whole thing in the 16-game argument thread that I started recently. I hope the Eagles are going to get blown out by the Buccaneers this weekend.
It's simple math. I don't mind the 7 playoff teams per conference. Hell, I'm old enough to remember when there were 5 teams per conference. It's just that the 17-game season screwed the math up to determine who should've been in the playoffs. What I'm trying to say is if the league hadn't gone to a 17-game schedule and made the Eagles play the Jets, they wouldn't be in the playoffs.A team that clinched the playoffs before the last week of the season (so, in 16 games) and was able to rest their starters can't be labeled as "not deserving" of being there. They didn't back into the post-season after losing, mishandle their own destiny, or need a lucky bounce or bad call in someone else's game. They played the schedule they were given and earned their spot in circumstances that were definitely fortunate, but THE SAME FOR EVERY TEAM.
Using your logic, no 7th seed ever is "deserving" of being in the playoffs because they never would have made it in the "old" days. GTFOH, grandpa.
So you've been putting that same energy out there on other teams every year since 1978 that "wouldn't have made it under a 14 game schedule?"It's simple math. I don't mind the 7 playoff teams per conference. Hell, I'm old enough to remember when there were 5 teams per conference. It's just that the 17-game season screwed the math up to determine who should've been in the playoffs. What I'm trying to say is if the league hadn't gone to a 17-game schedule and made the Eagles play the Jets, they wouldn't be in the playoffs.
https://media.giphy.com/media/BZQziX6q2hmX6/giphy.gifI'm going to go ahead & say the same thing about the Eagles that I did about the Steelers: they don't deserve to be in the playoffs this year. If it wasn't for the fact that the schedule went to 17 games and not keep it at 16 games, the Saints wouldn't have gotten screwed out of a playoff berth. And I'll explain what I'm talking about:
The Eagles would've been 8-8 if the league didn't add the game against the Jets and the Saints would've been 9-7 and made the playoffs as the #6 seed while dropping the 49ers to the #7 seed. In other words, the Eagles would've been out of the playoffs completely if it hadn't been for the 17-game schedule. I explained the whole thing in the 16-game argument thread that I started recently. I hope the Eagles are going to get blown out by the Buccaneers this weekend.
Or, in your scenario, if the Eagles had come into the last week of the season at 8-7 needing to win to get in the playoffs, they would have played their starters and could have beaten the Cowboys. Then they would have been in the playoffs thanks to their 40-29 beatdown of the Saints. So your conclusion is flawed because the facts of your scenario are incomplete.It's simple math. I don't mind the 7 playoff teams per conference. Hell, I'm old enough to remember when there were 5 teams per conference. It's just that the 17-game season screwed the math up to determine who should've been in the playoffs. What I'm trying to say is if the league hadn't gone to a 17-game schedule and made the Eagles play the Jets, they wouldn't be in the playoffs.
Since they made the playoffs *this year*, they absolutely deserve it using *this year's* rules.I'm going to go ahead & say the same thing about the Eagles that I did about the Steelers: they don't deserve to be in the playoffs this year. If it wasn't for the fact that the schedule went to 17 games and not keep it at 16 games, the Saints wouldn't have gotten screwed out of a playoff berth. And I'll explain what I'm talking about:
The Eagles would've been 8-8 if the league didn't add the game against the Jets and the Saints would've been 9-7 and made the playoffs as the #6 seed while dropping the 49ers to the #7 seed. In other words, the Eagles would've been out of the playoffs completely if it hadn't been for the 17-game schedule. I explained the whole thing in the 16-game argument thread that I started recently. I hope the Eagles are going to get blown out by the Buccaneers this weekend.
No, it's not "simple math". Without the 17 week schedule - Eagles don't have to wait till week 14 for the bye week. With that earlier bye - maybe they are fresher and don't lose to the Giants on the tail end of that 13 game stretch? No way to know.I'm going to go ahead & say the same thing about the Eagles that I did about the Steelers: they don't deserve to be in the playoffs this year. If it wasn't for the fact that the schedule went to 17 games and not keep it at 16 games, the Saints wouldn't have gotten screwed out of a playoff berth. And I'll explain what I'm talking about:
The Eagles would've been 8-8 if the league didn't add the game against the Jets and the Saints would've been 9-7 and made the playoffs as the #6 seed while dropping the 49ers to the #7 seed. In other words, the Eagles would've been out of the playoffs completely if it hadn't been for the 17-game schedule. I explained the whole thing in the 16-game argument thread that I started recently. I hope the Eagles are going to get blown out by the Buccaneers this weekend.
i am trying to remember the details, but it was the 2nd Giants game they had to play on a few days rest because of NFL changing the game against Washington to Tuesday right?No, it's not "simple math". Without the 17 week schedule - Eagles don't have to wait till week 14 for the bye week. With that earlier bye - maybe they are fresher and don't lose to the Giants on the tail end of that 13 game stretch? No way to know.
Heartbreak couldn't have happened to a more deserving group of fans after they heckled him about his newborn son being born 10 weeks premature 5 days before the game.To the thread title, I still have nightmares of Levon Kirkland trying to cover Joe Jurevicious over the middle. The Eagles were hoping Kirkland had one more good year in him before he retired. He didn't.
I’m not sure whether this ^ or the first poster responding to a non eagle fan that dare post in this thread with “gtfoh grandpa” is less surprisingHeartbreak couldn't have happened to a more deserving group of fans after they heckled him about his newborn son being born 10 weeks premature 5 days before the game.
LMAO context is everything. Apparently the guy is upset the Eagles made the playoffs as the 7th seed and is reminiscing already about the "good ole days of a 16 game schedule" hence the GTFOH Grandpa comment.I’m not sure whether this ^ or the first poster responding to a non eagle fan that dare post in this thread with “gtfoh grandpa” is less surprising
WTF are you talking about? It's a single game....determined by previous finish as 2 games already were. It makes it slightly easier for teams to move up (or down!) year to year and the formula is fixed. In ANY given year those 3 specific games can and DO affect the playoff teams, especially near the edges (5/6 seeds, now 7 seeds). With a 7th team, that effect will be more obvious then before, but IT ISN'T NEW!It's simple math. I don't mind the 7 playoff teams per conference. Hell, I'm old enough to remember when there were 5 teams per conference. It's just that the 17-game season screwed the math up to determine who should've been in the playoffs. What I'm trying to say is if the league hadn't gone to a 17-game schedule and made the Eagles play the Jets, they wouldn't be in the playoffs.
I wasn't telling him to get out of the thread, just the colloquial got out of here with that "you don't deserve it because you didn't earn it the old way" Abe Simpson crazy talk.I’m not sure whether this ^ or the first poster responding to a non eagle fan that dare post in this thread with “gtfoh grandpa” is less surprising