Bigboy10182000
Footballguy
And they use those sources for direct quotes.Journalists use unnamed sources all the time. Weird take.Tim is a good guy he doesn’t write fluff pieces or ********. He comes into my store a lot and my one customer is neighbors with him. If this was McLane I’d be weary but Tim doesn’t write click bait or fluff pieces like a lot of the other media in this townPer Tim McManus per a source there a disconnect between Sirianni, Hurts and Johnson on offensive philosophy.
Sirianni is also not as emotional as he once was is trying to keep them in check. Noticeable to players and staff
Source tells him that there’s been multiple finger pointing on both sides of the ball leading to various ideas how to fix things but some was biased for certain position groups. AJ brown spoke during one of the players only meetings say they need to trust their coaches. Meetings varied some players thought it was good others thought it led to more problems
Johnson is hugely regarded around the league. Hurts doesn’t like direction of offense wants more medium to short routes where brown thrives then flashy plays was hoping direction of offense would change in early stages of skid
Others close to source tell Tim it’s not a strong disconnect but getting use to a new Cordinator. Johnson trying to fit his philli to Nicks. Line is blurred so much who has most say most players don’t even know who has play calling power
Damning ESPN report about the state of the offense. Seems to be laying the groundwork with the timing for a firing on the horizon:
From quarterback disconnect to locker room tensions: How Nick Sirianni's Eagles descended into dysfunction
The Eagles begin their postseason with questions swirling around their offense, their defense and their coach's future in Philly.www.espn.com
Sorry I just can’t. When I got to this I literally laughed out loud.
“the source familiar with Hurts' thinking”
Is this a F’ing joke? I’m sure this has been typed up for months and waiting for the perfect time to drop. Pathetic.
“the source familiar with Hurts' thinking”
This is a reading the tea leaves total BS article. He’s basically admitting it with that line.
Regardless, citing a source who is familiar with someone’s thinking is laughable. Can you recall that being used ever prior to this article? Or is it a weird take cause it aligns with your beliefs?
This is not the same as using an unnamed source. Not even on the same planet.