*Official 2015 Philadelphia Eagles* - Winning when it doesnt count (1 Viewer)

[dhockster]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

FWIW, I really like this line.

 

[Mighty Mice]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

The 'improved' part I allude to isn't the whole season your stats reflect.

Getting better before the injury as in winning 3 of 4 vs. NO, NYG, CAR and DAL before getting knocked out v. MIA in a game he led (4 out of 5, perhaps)

Getting better before the injury is a rating of 103.4 v. DAL and 118.1 v MIA.

Yes, he can get better his second year in a new system, and his second year back playing football after missing 2 years with knee injuries.

That being said, I recognize opportunity cost here, and agree they shouldn't give him the money. My inclination is to believe that due to the above, they will give him the money.

 

[GoBirds]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

The 'improved' part I allude to isn't the whole season your stats reflect.

Getting better before the injury as in winning 3 of 4 vs. NO, NYG, CAR and DAL before getting knocked out v. MIA in a game he led (4 out of 5, perhaps)

Getting better before the injury is a rating of 103.4 v. DAL and 118.1 v MIA.

Yes, he can get better his second year in a new system, and his second year back playing football after missing 2 years with knee injuries.

That being said, I recognize opportunity cost here, and agree they shouldn't give him the money. My inclination is to believe that due to the above, they will give him the money.

This. Palmer is having a great year his 3rd year in Arizona after 2 that weren't. It can get better......we have to hope. Changing to a new journeyman QB after a year definitely isn't the answer.

 

[JuniorNB]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

The 'improved' part I allude to isn't the whole season your stats reflect.

Getting better before the injury as in winning 3 of 4 vs. NO, NYG, CAR and DAL before getting knocked out v. MIA in a game he led (4 out of 5, perhaps)

Getting better before the injury is a rating of 103.4 v. DAL and 118.1 v MIA.

Yes, he can get better his second year in a new system, and his second year back playing football after missing 2 years with knee injuries.

That being said, I recognize opportunity cost here, and agree they shouldn't give him the money. My inclination is to believe that due to the above, they will give him the money.

Exactly. Also, the Eagles receivers were dropping balls at a record clip at one point (that seems to have improved as of late). In fact, three of Bradford's interceptions were direct results of receiver screw-ups. Interceptions play a huge part in quarterback ratings. Take three interceptions away and Bradford's numbers are definitely middle of the pack. No one is calling for him to be paid top ten money. If they extend his current contract, he would be at #19 (probably #20, actually, since Andrew Luck is making only 7 million and will probably be renewed for much more). The only decent quarterbacks below him are guys on their rookie contracts (Winston, Mariota, Bortles, Bridgewater) and Fitzpatrick.

I have a feeling they'll extend his current deal. Or possibly offer a million per game played in the next two years.

 

[Mighty Mice]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

 

[Insein]

I will really be surprised if someone offers Bradford a big contract next year. It's not just that he hasn't shown much this year, it is more that he cannot stay healthy. No one is going to want to commit long-term dollars to this guy with his health history.

Well, all it takes is one dummy. However, the Raiders and the Redskins both seem to have their QB's right now, so that significantly lowers the chance that he gets a big contract.

He's probably looking at Fitz Hoyer McCown type money. Two for $10M. three for $14M. Hope he's invested well with that $78M he's made so far.

No way he's signing for that little. Hoyer, Fitz, and McCown are drifters. They are career backups who get a shot at starting once in a while. I'd be happy if Philly resigned him for $12/per. As long as it was incentive laden and had outs for games missed due to injury. But if he's looking for $18 million like Insein thinks he might, I hope Philly lets him walk. He's not worth that.

What has Bradford achieved over any of those guys (as an NFL player)? I'm sure he'll want more. There may be one team dumb enough to pay him more (perhaps Cleveland), but at this point I don't think he's highly thought of anymore. He's accomplished nothing at the NFL level and he's always injured.

That's why I think anyone who signs him are going to have a lot of injury clauses included. In fairness, I'd rather wait until the end of the season until I determine whether I want Philly to make a run at keeping him or not and at what price. If the season were over now, I would not pay him any more than 12 million per. That may seem high, but it would make him the 20th highest paid quarterback in the league. Keep in mind, Tannehill makes 19 mill. Kaepernick 19 mill. Stafford 17 mill. Alex Smith 17 mill. Nick Foles just signed for two years at 12.5 mill and he's been benched for their second and third stringers. To my eyes, Bradford was starting to look a lot more comfortable in the games before he got hurt. He threw a seed that went through Josh Huff's hands that would have had them a 2 point conversion from a tie in the 4th quarter at Carolina, followed by a very good game at Dallas, and a good start against Miami (albeit, followed by a crappy second quarter). And then he got hurt. So if he continues to improve in these last five games, then maybe I'd concede that he's worth a bit more, but right now, I'd offer him 12. If he goes elsewhere, pay Fitzpatrick $10 mill (he currently makes 3.5) for 2 years and hope you have drafted your successor in the meantime.

Yes. If we sign Bradford for $12mil/yr for a 2-3 year deal with lots of outs for injury, then that'd be a fair deal for the team. QB is expensive anymore and $12mil is below the mean.

 

[dhockster]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

The 'improved' part I allude to isn't the whole season your stats reflect.

Getting better before the injury as in winning 3 of 4 vs. NO, NYG, CAR and DAL before getting knocked out v. MIA in a game he led (4 out of 5, perhaps)

Getting better before the injury is a rating of 103.4 v. DAL and 118.1 v MIA.

Yes, he can get better his second year in a new system, and his second year back playing football after missing 2 years with knee injuries.

That being said, I recognize opportunity cost here, and agree they shouldn't give him the money. My inclination is to believe that due to the above, they will give him the money.

This. Palmer is having a great year his 3rd year in Arizona after 2 that weren't. It can get better......we have to hope. Changing to a new journeyman QB after a year definitely isn't the answer.

Palmer was having a good year last year before getting hurt 11/3 TD to Int ratio, 6-0 record. He also had really good years in Cincinnati.

Bradford has never had that kind of success.

I will of course hope Bradford gets better, but his brittleness will not change and his lack of mobility in the pocket will not change either.

The thing I like about Fitzpatrick in watching him last year with the Texans, and a few games this year with the Jets, is his competitiveness. He is a fighter. I don't know if Bradford has that same mentality. Now is Fitzpatrick the long-term answer? Of course not. I don't think there is a long term answer unless the Eagles draft him. Like others have said though, we will probably sign Bradford and hope for the best.

 

[Insein]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

 

[Mighty Mice]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

Absolutely agree. I just don't think he could have done less than Sanchez! Optimistic we do *ANYTHING* in the second half, and anything would have been enough.

 

[Mighty Mice]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

Losing Mathews in the 2Q of that game hurt lots as well. He's barely getting back into limited involvement this week, after the second half of MIA and the missing two more games. Dude really had his bell rung. Hopeful he's okay. If we insist in running out of the shotgun, he's by car the best option.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

After having time to digest the anger and frustration from this last month, I think we can rationally see that Chip is not getting fired and nor should he get fired.

Think about how many times we look to Cleveland, Jacksonville, Tennessee, Oakland, etc and how they're a revolving door for coaches. We all declare them joke organizations doomed to stay where they are. Now if Lurie were to fire Chip after 3 seasons, 2 of them successful, the Eagles could be in danger of becoming one of them. Because once Lurie pulls the trigger on a coach early, he has the power to do it again, and again and again at the first sign of failure.

Chip has made some mistakes, pretty terrible ones but he also had some pretty good ideas and can certainly coach when called upon. Firing him after one bad year is like a bad Bond Villain killing his top scientist for failing one time. Give the guy a chance to make some corrections.

Chips going to be our coach at least through 2017. We'll see if he's as smart as he thinks he is.

It all depends on how the team feels. Even through all the BS Reid teams the players loved him. If Chip loses the players he just has to go.

Doesn't everything sort of indicate that he already has?

Sadly, yes. Ross Tuker was on 94.1 this morning and said after the Detroit game he interviewed Ziggy Ansah. He asked Ziggy if he felt the Eagles quit.....he said Ziggy paused for a few seconds, said good question, and then said "All I can tell you is that in the 3rd quarter, I came off the field and told the team to go get their stats because they're done playing"

IMHO, it's not foregone conclusion that he's back with us next season. After seeing all the money USC gave their HC its obvious where Chip wants to be but he may not have a say.

 

[GoBirds]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

The 'improved' part I allude to isn't the whole season your stats reflect.

Getting better before the injury as in winning 3 of 4 vs. NO, NYG, CAR and DAL before getting knocked out v. MIA in a game he led (4 out of 5, perhaps)

Getting better before the injury is a rating of 103.4 v. DAL and 118.1 v MIA.

Yes, he can get better his second year in a new system, and his second year back playing football after missing 2 years with knee injuries.

That being said, I recognize opportunity cost here, and agree they shouldn't give him the money. My inclination is to believe that due to the above, they will give him the money.

This. Palmer is having a great year his 3rd year in Arizona after 2 that weren't. It can get better......we have to hope. Changing to a new journeyman QB after a year definitely isn't the answer.

Palmer was having a good year last year before getting hurt 11/3 TD to Int ratio, 6-0 record. He also had really good years in Cincinnati.

Bradford has never had that kind of success.

I will of course hope Bradford gets better, but his brittleness will not change and his lack of mobility in the pocket will not change either.

The thing I like about Fitzpatrick in watching him last year with the Texans, and a few games this year with the Jets, is his competitiveness. He is a fighter. I don't know if Bradford has that same mentality. Now is Fitzpatrick the long-term answer? Of course not. I don't think there is a long term answer unless the Eagles draft him. Like others have said though, we will probably sign Bradford and hope for the best.

Not saying Palmer hasn't had a better career, the Palmer Arizona signed though was a castoff of the Raiders that no one was excited about. His early career was great for a couple of years, I have compared the Oakland to Arizona Palmer situation.

 

[ShaHBucks]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

Absolutely agree. I just don't think he could have done less than Sanchez! Optimistic we do *ANYTHING* in the second half, and anything would have been enough.

Sanchez is 4-6 with a 86.6 passer rate as an EagleBradford is 4-5 with a 82.4 passer rate as an Eagle

No evidence supports the bias between the two. It's not like Chip was chasing absolute bums, but for some reason or another they just aren't good QB's in the NFL. You get a good drive or two and hope they stay away from turnovers.

 

[JuniorNB]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

Absolutely agree. I just don't think he could have done less than Sanchez! Optimistic we do *ANYTHING* in the second half, and anything would have been enough.

Sanchez is 4-6 with a 86.6 passer rate as an EagleBradford is 4-5 with a 82.4 passer rate as an Eagle

No evidence supports the bias between the two. It's not like Chip was chasing absolute bums, but for some reason or another they just aren't good QB's in the NFL. You get a good drive or two and hope they stay away from turnovers.

Have you watched any of the last two games? Sanchez was a disaster. Foles-like.

This season, Sanchez is 0-3. Who cares what his record was last year?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

Absolutely agree. I just don't think he could have done less than Sanchez! Optimistic we do *ANYTHING* in the second half, and anything would have been enough.

Sanchez is 4-6 with a 86.6 passer rate as an EagleBradford is 4-5 with a 82.4 passer rate as an Eagle

No evidence supports the bias between the two. It's not like Chip was chasing absolute bums, but for some reason or another they just aren't good QB's in the NFL. You get a good drive or two and hope they stay away from turnovers.

Have you watched any of the last two games? Sanchez was a disaster. Foles-like.

This season, Sanchez is 0-3. Who cares what his record was last year?

Well, he is technically 0-2 since he didn't start the Miami game - and while he didn't look good I'm fairly certain Winston and Stafford each throwing for 5 TDs against their defense was the reason the Eagles lost.

 

[babydemon90]

Damaris Johnson goes 9-135-2 against us on Sunday.

 

[JuniorNB]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

Absolutely agree. I just don't think he could have done less than Sanchez! Optimistic we do *ANYTHING* in the second half, and anything would have been enough.

Sanchez is 4-6 with a 86.6 passer rate as an EagleBradford is 4-5 with a 82.4 passer rate as an Eagle

No evidence supports the bias between the two. It's not like Chip was chasing absolute bums, but for some reason or another they just aren't good QB's in the NFL. You get a good drive or two and hope they stay away from turnovers.

Have you watched any of the last two games? Sanchez was a disaster. Foles-like.

This season, Sanchez is 0-3. Who cares what his record was last year?

Well, he is technically 0-2 since he didn't start the Miami game - and while he didn't look good I'm fairly certain Winston and Stafford each throwing for 5 TDs against their defense was the reason the Eagles lost.

If it was baseball, he'd be 0-3 since Philly had the lead when Bradford got hurt.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

We can argue QB's until we die--none of them will matter if we have such a poor set of weapons....none of them can be truly judged either because of that and the offense Chip wants to run. In our offense the QB can't read the D for long pre-snap or make any audibles. Theyre already going in limited because of that and when you add our talent at WR and TE they will all seem average to below average

 

[ShaHBucks]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

Absolutely agree. I just don't think he could have done less than Sanchez! Optimistic we do *ANYTHING* in the second half, and anything would have been enough.

Sanchez is 4-6 with a 86.6 passer rate as an EagleBradford is 4-5 with a 82.4 passer rate as an Eagle

No evidence supports the bias between the two. It's not like Chip was chasing absolute bums, but for some reason or another they just aren't good QB's in the NFL. You get a good drive or two and hope they stay away from turnovers.

Have you watched any of the last two games? Sanchez was a disaster. Foles-like.This season, Sanchez is 0-3. Who cares what his record was last year?

Do realize that you're disputing with facts, not ME. I put my statement in context. Draw from/dismiss what you like. "As an Eagle" nothing is Foles-like under Chip's system, for the trillionth time. Bradford and Sanchez have been nearly identical performers here. I don't know how hard that is to comprehend.

 

[ShaHBucks]

We can argue QB's until we die--none of them will matter if we have such a poor set of weapons....none of them can be truly judged either because of that and the offense Chip wants to run. In our offense the QB can't read the D for long pre-snap or make any audibles. Theyre already going in limited because of that and when you add our talent at WR and TE they will all seem average to below average

And then you watch the Patriots opporate like a machine and adjust to personnel accordingly.

 

[JuniorNB]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

Absolutely agree. I just don't think he could have done less than Sanchez! Optimistic we do *ANYTHING* in the second half, and anything would have been enough.

Sanchez is 4-6 with a 86.6 passer rate as an EagleBradford is 4-5 with a 82.4 passer rate as an Eagle

No evidence supports the bias between the two. It's not like Chip was chasing absolute bums, but for some reason or another they just aren't good QB's in the NFL. You get a good drive or two and hope they stay away from turnovers.

Have you watched any of the last two games? Sanchez was a disaster. Foles-like.This season, Sanchez is 0-3. Who cares what his record was last year?

Do realize that you're disputing with facts, not ME. I put my statement in context. Draw from/dismiss what you like. "As an Eagle" nothing is Foles-like under Chip's system, for the trillionth time. Bradford and Sanchez have been nearly identical performers here. I don't know how hard that is to comprehend.

what seems to be hard for you to comprehend, is how Chip's offense took the league by surprise in 2013. Everyone was awesome. By 2014, the league adjusted. The offense was still good, but no one looked great like the year before. Not Foles, not mccoy, hell, not even Riley Cooper. This year, defenses are calling out the plays. So you can recite stats from 2013 till you're blue in the face. Past seasons are meaningless. Sanchez is 0-3 this year and the Eagles look like they don't even belong on the field. At least they were a. 500 team with Bradford.

 

[ShaHBucks]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

Absolutely agree. I just don't think he could have done less than Sanchez! Optimistic we do *ANYTHING* in the second half, and anything would have been enough.

Sanchez is 4-6 with a 86.6 passer rate as an EagleBradford is 4-5 with a 82.4 passer rate as an Eagle

No evidence supports the bias between the two. It's not like Chip was chasing absolute bums, but for some reason or another they just aren't good QB's in the NFL. You get a good drive or two and hope they stay away from turnovers.

Have you watched any of the last two games? Sanchez was a disaster. Foles-like.This season, Sanchez is 0-3. Who cares what his record was last year?

Do realize that you're disputing with facts, not ME. I put my statement in context. Draw from/dismiss what you like. "As an Eagle" nothing is Foles-like under Chip's system, for the trillionth time. Bradford and Sanchez have been nearly identical performers here. I don't know how hard that is to comprehend.

what seems to be hard for you to comprehend, is how Chip's offense took the league by surprise in 2013. Everyone was awesome. By 2014, the league adjusted. The offense was still good, but no one looked great like the year before. Not Foles, not mccoy, hell, not even Riley Cooper. This year, defenses are calling out the plays. So you can recite stats from 2013 till you're blue in the face. Past seasons are meaningless. Sanchez is 0-3 this year and the Eagles look like they don't even belong on the field. At least they were a. 500 team with Bradford.

Ok? It still happend. The rest is subjective. If I, or anyone, choose to discuss QBs in Chip's system then of course past seasons matter. You just want to dismiss it to make your case. How to lie with statistics is a favorite book of mine. You really think Bradford would have mattered the past two games? I Don't think he can tackle D. Martin or guard Calvin Johnson via perfect passes, nor conduct an offense that can put up 50 points. He'll get his chance vs Brady if that's what you think.

 

[JuniorNB]

It's completely unprovable, but IMO if Bradford (and Mathews) doesn't get a concussion in the 2nd Q versus Miami they win that game. A win would have made 4 out of 5 in a row, moving the record to 5-4 after a 1-3 start.

Injuries happen, though, and our well paid backup needed to produce some second half points and not throw a game crushing INT in the end zone on 2nd and Goal.

Regardless of what happened the two games after that, a win there and at a minimum Philly is tied for first today.

IMO, Chip sees this and stays the course, for better or worse. Who knows, though.

It's certainly possible but the offense stalled after that first quarter. They went 6 straight drives with a punt (or the almost int before half) before Sam got hurt. Given what has happened since, I don't know that we could say they win the Miami game even with Sam.

Absolutely agree. I just don't think he could have done less than Sanchez! Optimistic we do *ANYTHING* in the second half, and anything would have been enough.

Sanchez is 4-6 with a 86.6 passer rate as an EagleBradford is 4-5 with a 82.4 passer rate as an Eagle

No evidence supports the bias between the two. It's not like Chip was chasing absolute bums, but for some reason or another they just aren't good QB's in the NFL. You get a good drive or two and hope they stay away from turnovers.

Have you watched any of the last two games? Sanchez was a disaster. Foles-like.This season, Sanchez is 0-3. Who cares what his record was last year?

Do realize that you're disputing with facts, not ME. I put my statement in context. Draw from/dismiss what you like. "As an Eagle" nothing is Foles-like under Chip's system, for the trillionth time. Bradford and Sanchez have been nearly identical performers here. I don't know how hard that is to comprehend.

what seems to be hard for you to comprehend, is how Chip's offense took the league by surprise in 2013. Everyone was awesome. By 2014, the league adjusted. The offense was still good, but no one looked great like the year before. Not Foles, not mccoy, hell, not even Riley Cooper. This year, defenses are calling out the plays. So you can recite stats from 2013 till you're blue in the face. Past seasons are meaningless. Sanchez is 0-3 this year and the Eagles look like they don't even belong on the field. At least they were a. 500 team with Bradford.

Ok? It still happend. The rest is subjective. If I, or anyone, choose to discuss QBs in Chip's system then of course past seasons matter. You just want to dismiss it to make your case. How to lie with statistics is a favorite book of mine. You really think Bradford would have mattered the past two games? I Don't think he can tackle D. Martin or guard Calvin Johnson via perfect passes, nor conduct an offense that can put up 50 points. He'll get his chance vs Brady if that's what you think.

I gave my New England prediction. Ugly. 31-14.

 

[GoBirds]

Damaris Johnson goes 9-135-2 against us on Sunday.

This. Complete BB move to rub it in our face as they win by 3 scores.

 

[renesauz]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

The 'improved' part I allude to isn't the whole season your stats reflect.

Getting better before the injury as in winning 3 of 4 vs. NO, NYG, CAR and DAL before getting knocked out v. MIA in a game he led (4 out of 5, perhaps)

Getting better before the injury is a rating of 103.4 v. DAL and 118.1 v MIA.

Yes, he can get better his second year in a new system, and his second year back playing football after missing 2 years with knee injuries.

That being said, I recognize opportunity cost here, and agree they shouldn't give him the money. My inclination is to believe that due to the above, they will give him the money.

This. Palmer is having a great year his 3rd year in Arizona after 2 that weren't. It can get better......we have to hope. Changing to a new journeyman QB after a year definitely isn't the answer.

Agreed 100%

Draft someone to groom, but keep Bradford for now and hope he continues to improve.

 

[Insein]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

The 'improved' part I allude to isn't the whole season your stats reflect.Getting better before the injury as in winning 3 of 4 vs. NO, NYG, CAR and DAL before getting knocked out v. MIA in a game he led (4 out of 5, perhaps)

Getting better before the injury is a rating of 103.4 v. DAL and 118.1 v MIA.

Yes, he can get better his second year in a new system, and his second year back playing football after missing 2 years with knee injuries.

That being said, I recognize opportunity cost here, and agree they shouldn't give him the money. My inclination is to believe that due to the above, they will give him the money.

This. Palmer is having a great year his 3rd year in Arizona after 2 that weren't. It can get better......we have to hope. Changing to a new journeyman QB after a year definitely isn't the answer.

Agreed 100%Draft someone to groom, but keep Bradford for now and hope he continues to improve.

If he's cheap. I don't think he will be.

 

[babydemon90]

We can argue QB's until we die--none of them will matter if we have such a poor set of weapons....none of them can be truly judged either because of that and the offense Chip wants to run. In our offense the QB can't read the D for long pre-snap or make any audibles. Theyre already going in limited because of that and when you add our talent at WR and TE they will all seem average to below average

And then you watch the Patriots opporate like a machine and adjust to personnel accordingly.

yea, in fairness though, no one in the league seems able to adjust to personnel like the Pats do.

 

[babydemon90]

What we NEED, is for Agholor and HUff to step up. We've invested picks in weapons - we need to get improvement from them. Can't count in bringing in some stud WR via FA.

 

[Insein]

What we NEED, is for Agholor and HUff to step up. We've invested picks in weapons - we need to get improvement from them. Can't count in bringing in some stud WR via FA.

That's the thing. What weapons has he developed on offense?Ertz, Barkley, Matthews, Huff, Agholar

Who's gotten better?

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

The 'improved' part I allude to isn't the whole season your stats reflect.

Getting better before the injury as in winning 3 of 4 vs. NO, NYG, CAR and DAL before getting knocked out v. MIA in a game he led (4 out of 5, perhaps)

Getting better before the injury is a rating of 103.4 v. DAL and 118.1 v MIA.

Yes, he can get better his second year in a new system, and his second year back playing football after missing 2 years with knee injuries.

That being said, I recognize opportunity cost here, and agree they shouldn't give him the money. My inclination is to believe that due to the above, they will give him the money.

This. Palmer is having a great year his 3rd year in Arizona after 2 that weren't. It can get better......we have to hope. Changing to a new journeyman QB after a year definitely isn't the answer.

Agreed 100%

Draft someone to groom, but keep Bradford for now and hope he continues to improve.

I've had a couple of drinks, so I'm feeling bold.

I'm going on record as saying it will be a colossal mistake if the Eagles extend Bradford at anything more than bottom-end starter money (say $10M/year). They're harder up against the cap than I'm comfortable with and there are just too many other gaping holes to fill.

 

[JuniorNB]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

The 'improved' part I allude to isn't the whole season your stats reflect.Getting better before the injury as in winning 3 of 4 vs. NO, NYG, CAR and DAL before getting knocked out v. MIA in a game he led (4 out of 5, perhaps)

Getting better before the injury is a rating of 103.4 v. DAL and 118.1 v MIA.

Yes, he can get better his second year in a new system, and his second year back playing football after missing 2 years with knee injuries.

That being said, I recognize opportunity cost here, and agree they shouldn't give him the money. My inclination is to believe that due to the above, they will give him the money.

This. Palmer is having a great year his 3rd year in Arizona after 2 that weren't. It can get better......we have to hope. Changing to a new journeyman QB after a year definitely isn't the answer.

Agreed 100%Draft someone to groom, but keep Bradford for now and hope he continues to improve.

I've had a couple of drinks, so I'm feeling bold.

I'm going on record as saying it will be a colossal mistake if the Eagles extend Bradford at anything more than bottom-end starter money (say $10M/year). They're harder up against the cap than I'm comfortable with and there are just too many other gaping holes to fill.

so who would you like to be the Eagles QB in 2016? Because tannehill makes 19 Mill and Alex Smith makes 17 Mill. Bradford is at 13 now. He's not signing for 10.

 

[Insein]

There are no winners in that fight. FWIW I think we're married to Bradford. Chip's going to see this through with his plan, his coordinators, and his QB. Frankly, he gave up too much to cut bait this quickly. The fact they offered to extend him preseason is also indicative of this IMO. And, honestly, he was getting better before his injury and with a year in system, should be better still in 2016.

Chip is in love with Bradford's potential. When he speaks of him, it's as if he thought he heard bells. Might just be a garbage truck backing up, but not sure Chip agrees.

Prediction: 2 years, $28.5M

An improved Sam Bradford currently ranks 26th in QB rating, 29th in QBR, 27th in ANY/A. How big is the gap between those numbers and where he'd need to be to lead this team to the promised land, and is it really reasonable to expect that much more improvement from him at this stage in his career?

It's all about opportunity cost. You just can't pay a guy mid-range starter money to deliver ANY/A's in the 25-28 range when you can get those numbers from a half-dozen other guys at a quarter of the price tag. Even if those guys are just there to serve as stopgaps while you draft and groom your QB of the future.

The NFL salary cap is a real ##### of a mistress.

The 'improved' part I allude to isn't the whole season your stats reflect.Getting better before the injury as in winning 3 of 4 vs. NO, NYG, CAR and DAL before getting knocked out v. MIA in a game he led (4 out of 5, perhaps)

Getting better before the injury is a rating of 103.4 v. DAL and 118.1 v MIA.

Yes, he can get better his second year in a new system, and his second year back playing football after missing 2 years with knee injuries.

That being said, I recognize opportunity cost here, and agree they shouldn't give him the money. My inclination is to believe that due to the above, they will give him the money.

This. Palmer is having a great year his 3rd year in Arizona after 2 that weren't. It can get better......we have to hope. Changing to a new journeyman QB after a year definitely isn't the answer.

Agreed 100%Draft someone to groom, but keep Bradford for now and hope he continues to improve.

I've had a couple of drinks, so I'm feeling bold.

I'm going on record as saying it will be a colossal mistake if the Eagles extend Bradford at anything more than bottom-end starter money (say $10M/year). They're harder up against the cap than I'm comfortable with and there are just too many other gaping holes to fill.

so who would you like to be the Eagles QB in 2016? Because tannehill makes 19 Mill and Alex Smith makes 17 Mill. Bradford is at 13 now. He's not signing for 10.

Unless he's terrible down the stretch. In which case do we even want him.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

We can argue QB's until we die--none of them will matter if we have such a poor set of weapons....none of them can be truly judged either because of that and the offense Chip wants to run. In our offense the QB can't read the D for long pre-snap or make any audibles. Theyre already going in limited because of that and when you add our talent at WR and TE they will all seem average to below average

And then you watch the Patriots opporate like a machine and adjust to personnel accordingly.

Yep, and what's odd about this is when Chip came the big thing was that he adapts to the personnel he has.... and over the past 3 years he has become more and more set in his ways.

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

I've had a couple of drinks, so I'm feeling bold.I'm going on record as saying it will be a colossal mistake if the Eagles extend Bradford at anything more than bottom-end starter money (say $10M/year). They're harder up against the cap than I'm comfortable with and there are just too many other gaping holes to fill.

so who would you like to be the Eagles QB in 2016? Because tannehill makes 19 Mill and Alex Smith makes 17 Mill. Bradford is at 13 now. He's not signing for 10.

I don't know. I don't have all the answers. But I do know there's no point in signing Bradford for $14M when you are almost guaranteed to be able to get his level of production out of a journeyman at 1/4 the price while leaving your QB options open in the draft. And the extra $11 mil a year gives you a lot of options to shore up your defense.

FWIW, I foresaw the worst-case scenario when Bradford was brought in as the Birds getting through the whole season, Sam flashing some potential but missing some games and being mediocre in many others, and the Eagles still not knowing exactly what they have in him when they face the choice between plunking down $40M or letting him walk. We're uncomfortably close to exactly that right now.

 

[jurb26]

Curious as to what people think Philly does with the RB position next year. They are on pace to have the highest (by a huge margin) payroll dedicated to RBs, 13.27%. That's ridiculous. They have 3 RBs making top 15 money.

 

[JuniorNB]

I've had a couple of drinks, so I'm feeling bold.I'm going on record as saying it will be a colossal mistake if the Eagles extend Bradford at anything more than bottom-end starter money (say $10M/year). They're harder up against the cap than I'm comfortable with and there are just too many other gaping holes to fill.

so who would you like to be the Eagles QB in 2016? Because tannehill makes 19 Mill and Alex Smith makes 17 Mill. Bradford is at 13 now. He's not signing for 10.

I don't know. I don't have all the answers. But I do know there's no point in signing Bradford for $14M when you are almost guaranteed to be able to get his level of production out of a journeyman at 1/4 the price while leaving your QB options open in the draft. And the extra $11 mil a year gives you a lot of options to shore up your defense.

FWIW, I foresaw the worst-case scenario when Bradford was brought in as the Birds getting through the whole season, Sam flashing some potential but missing some games and being mediocre in many others, and the Eagles still not knowing exactly what they have in him when they face the choice between plunking down $40M or letting him walk. We're uncomfortably close to exactly that right now.

He's currently at 13 million. I'd have no problem extending his current contract for two years with a lot of injury incentives. Like, miss two starts and it's 11 million. Miss 4 starts and it's 9 million...etc.

At 13 million, he's the 19th highest paid quarterback. As I said earlier, eliminate the guys on their rookie contract, and the only one playing better than he is that's below him is Ryan Fitzpatrick. He's actually fairly compensated.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

so who would you like to be the Eagles QB in 2016? Because tannehill makes 19 Mill and Alex Smith makes 17 Mill. Bradford is at 13 now. He's not signing for 10.

Tannehill's salary is due to an incompetent front office bidding against itself, so to speak. Alex Smith is much maligned but has brought two different franchises into the playoffs and played very well once there (something Bradford hasn't done yet). It's fun to bash him, but he's really not a bad QB.

Your general point is valid however, there just aren't enough QBs to go around and most are overpaid as a result. I think the smart franchises are going to have to be disciplined enough to not fall into that trap and only pay those that deserve it - easier said then done though of course.

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

Curious as to what people think Philly does with the RB position next year. They are on pace to have the highest (by a huge margin) payroll dedicated to RBs, 13.27%. That's ridiculous. They have 3 RBs making top 15 money.

Chip the GM has really painted himself into a corner there. DeMarco's contract is a boat anchor (he'd carry a $13M cap hit if cut or traded in '16) and Mathews' isn't much better (only a $1M cap savings if cut).

Sproles is almost certain to be the odd man out as he can be cut for only $1M and I really can't see them wanting to go into next season with, as you say, 3 top-15 salary guys at RB. It's a shame as I'd rather see either of the other two gone and Sproles kept - but then again he's already 32 so you gotta wonder how much is left in the tank anyway.

I really thought coming into this season that, while the RB spending was ridiculous, Chip would at least have an excuse to run the ever-loving crap outta the ball. But through 11 games, they're sitting at a 40/60 run/pass ratio. It's just baffling.

 

[Insein]

Curious as to what people think Philly does with the RB position next year. They are on pace to have the highest (by a huge margin) payroll dedicated to RBs, 13.27%. That's ridiculous. They have 3 RBs making top 15 money.

Murray can't be moved. Costs too much to cut and no one is trading for him. Mathews has shown he can play when healthy. Sproles is done IMO. I think he's gone. Maybe Barner moves into the 3rd spot. Ext year. Perhaps this off season, Chip can do some adjusting to his scheme.

 

[jon007]

Curious as to what people think Philly does with the RB position next year. They are on pace to have the highest (by a huge margin) payroll dedicated to RBs, 13.27%. That's ridiculous. They have 3 RBs making top 15 money.

Murray can't be moved. Costs too much to cut and no one is trading for him. Mathews has shown he can play when healthy. Sproles is done IMO. I think he's gone. Maybe Barner moves into the 3rd spot. Ext year. Perhaps this off season, Chip can do some adjusting to his scheme.

I hope so. I remember watching this video when the Eagles first signed Chip. This season has really baffled me with his personnel usage. I know Chip takes all the credit good or bad but I am curious just how much decision power he gives his coordinators. I simply can't wrap my head around some of the play calls and player usage this season. The end of the video was what got me very excited about Chip coming to Philly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9fWpnxyUcU

 

[Mighty Mice]

Pretty damning, direct stuff from Phil Sheridan on ESPN:

"The division race appeared to be about the same coming into this season. The Cowboys and the Eagles would compete for the title while Washington and New York played out their schedules in oblivion.

And that’s just what Washington and New York are, two oblivious teams with no business being in the conversation about NFC contenders. That was clear Sunday, as the Giants stumbled around the FedEx Stadium Field and blew their tenuous grip on first place in the division.

It may come down to Washington and New York for the division title, but that’s not because either team has been particularly good. It is because the Eagles and Cowboys have been epic disappointments.

One of those teams has an excuse. Injuries have cost Dallas the services of quarterback Tony Romo for most of the season. Wide receiver Dez Bryant was also out for a long stretch. While that lets Dallas off the hook a bit, it does nothing but make the Eagles’ failure this season look even worse.

Their three-game losing streak -- against Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit -- was only the most dramatic (and most recent) chapter in the Eagles’ story. The reality is, this Eagles team has been inexcusably out of sync since the beginning of the regular season.

They lost their season opener in Atlanta to a team that has lost five of its last six games.

They lost to Dallas at home thanks to one of the most pathetic offensive performances you’ll ever see.

They let Washington drive 90 yards for the game-winning touchdown at FedEx Field.

They were thoroughly outclassed by the Carolina Panthers.

An overtime victory against the Romo-less Cowboys got the Eagles to 4-4 and lent credence to the idea that they were still very much alive in the NFC East. And they were, but only because the NFC East was that pathetic.

If the Eagles were anything close to a legitimate contender, they would have beaten Atlanta, Washington, Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit. OK, let’s allow for a poor game here and there. That happens.

The Eagles should have no worse than a 7-4 record. That would have them in first place in the NFC East. Even with tough remaining games against New England (Dec. 6) and Arizona (Dec. 20), the Eagles would be in control of the division race and their own playoff destiny.

Now they are 4-7. Worse, they are coming off two of the worst performances in franchise history. Their losses to Tampa Bay and Detroit, by a combined score of 90-31, have called Kelly’s entire program into question. They were losses of a kind you only saw in franchise-shaking seasons: 1994, when Rich Kotite lost his last seven games; 1998, when Ray Rhodes’ final team went 3-13; 2012, when Andy Reid’s mistakes caught up to him all at once.

They were losses that you would see only when coaches were on their way out the door, losses that forced that door open.

It may be too late for the Eagles to bounce back and win this wretched NFC East title. But there is still time for them to win three or four of their remaining games and remove some of the stench from this horrendous season. There is time for Kelly and his players to leave a more positive impression than they have through their first 11 games.

That shouldn’t be that hard, really. It has been a pretty lousy impression."

 

[Deamon]

Curious as to what people think Philly does with the RB position next year. They are on pace to have the highest (by a huge margin) payroll dedicated to RBs, 13.27%. That's ridiculous. They have 3 RBs making top 15 money.

Chip the GM has really painted himself into a corner there. DeMarco's contract is a boat anchor (he'd carry a $13M cap hit if cut or traded in '16) and Mathews' isn't much better (only a $1M cap savings if cut).

Sproles is almost certain to be the odd man out as he can be cut for only $1M and I really can't see them wanting to go into next season with, as you say, 3 top-15 salary guys at RB. It's a shame as I'd rather see either of the other two gone and Sproles kept - but then again he's already 32 so you gotta wonder how much is left in the tank anyway.

I really thought coming into this season that, while the RB spending was ridiculous, Chip would at least have an excuse to run the ever-loving crap outta the ball. But through 11 games, they're sitting at a 40/60 run/pass ratio. It's just baffling.

While I agree that we should be running the ball more with all this money invested, the league is a passing league now. Even though we're at 40/60, we are the 14th highest team in the NFL in terms of percentage of plays we are running the ball. Still in the top half of teams who run the ball a lot, so I don't think it's as baffling when you look at it that way.

Also our oline (and maybe demarco too) has sucked. I still think Chip really wants to lead the league in rushing, its just not working.

 

[Deamon]

Pretty damning, direct stuff from Phil Sheridan on ESPN:

"The division race appeared to be about the same coming into this season. The Cowboys and the Eagles would compete for the title while Washington and New York played out their schedules in oblivion.

And that’s just what Washington and New York are, two oblivious teams with no business being in the conversation about NFC contenders. That was clear Sunday, as the Giants stumbled around the FedEx Stadium Field and blew their tenuous grip on first place in the division.

It may come down to Washington and New York for the division title, but that’s not because either team has been particularly good. It is because the Eagles and Cowboys have been epic disappointments.

One of those teams has an excuse. Injuries have cost Dallas the services of quarterback Tony Romo for most of the season. Wide receiver Dez Bryant was also out for a long stretch. While that lets Dallas off the hook a bit, it does nothing but make the Eagles’ failure this season look even worse.

Their three-game losing streak -- against Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit -- was only the most dramatic (and most recent) chapter in the Eagles’ story. The reality is, this Eagles team has been inexcusably out of sync since the beginning of the regular season.

They lost their season opener in Atlanta to a team that has lost five of its last six games.

They lost to Dallas at home thanks to one of the most pathetic offensive performances you’ll ever see.

They let Washington drive 90 yards for the game-winning touchdown at FedEx Field.

They were thoroughly outclassed by the Carolina Panthers.

An overtime victory against the Romo-less Cowboys got the Eagles to 4-4 and lent credence to the idea that they were still very much alive in the NFC East. And they were, but only because the NFC East was that pathetic.

If the Eagles were anything close to a legitimate contender, they would have beaten Atlanta, Washington, Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit. OK, let’s allow for a poor game here and there. That happens.

The Eagles should have no worse than a 7-4 record. That would have them in first place in the NFC East. Even with tough remaining games against New England (Dec. 6) and Arizona (Dec. 20), the Eagles would be in control of the division race and their own playoff destiny.

Now they are 4-7. Worse, they are coming off two of the worst performances in franchise history. Their losses to Tampa Bay and Detroit, by a combined score of 90-31, have called Kelly’s entire program into question. They were losses of a kind you only saw in franchise-shaking seasons: 1994, when Rich Kotite lost his last seven games; 1998, when Ray Rhodes’ final team went 3-13; 2012, when Andy Reid’s mistakes caught up to him all at once.

They were losses that you would see only when coaches were on their way out the door, losses that forced that door open.

It may be too late for the Eagles to bounce back and win this wretched NFC East title. But there is still time for them to win three or four of their remaining games and remove some of the stench from this horrendous season. There is time for Kelly and his players to leave a more positive impression than they have through their first 11 games.

That shouldn’t be that hard, really. It has been a pretty lousy impression."

Quite the article full of unique statements from Captain Obvious. Don't think anyone is calling them a legitimate contender right now but its nice of him to argue that they aren't one.

 

[Mighty Mice]

Pretty damning, direct stuff from Phil Sheridan on ESPN:

"The division race appeared to be about the same coming into this season. The Cowboys and the Eagles would compete for the title while Washington and New York played out their schedules in oblivion.

And that’s just what Washington and New York are, two oblivious teams with no business being in the conversation about NFC contenders. That was clear Sunday, as the Giants stumbled around the FedEx Stadium Field and blew their tenuous grip on first place in the division.

It may come down to Washington and New York for the division title, but that’s not because either team has been particularly good. It is because the Eagles and Cowboys have been epic disappointments.

One of those teams has an excuse. Injuries have cost Dallas the services of quarterback Tony Romo for most of the season. Wide receiver Dez Bryant was also out for a long stretch. While that lets Dallas off the hook a bit, it does nothing but make the Eagles’ failure this season look even worse.

Their three-game losing streak -- against Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit -- was only the most dramatic (and most recent) chapter in the Eagles’ story. The reality is, this Eagles team has been inexcusably out of sync since the beginning of the regular season.

They lost their season opener in Atlanta to a team that has lost five of its last six games.

They lost to Dallas at home thanks to one of the most pathetic offensive performances you’ll ever see.

They let Washington drive 90 yards for the game-winning touchdown at FedEx Field.

They were thoroughly outclassed by the Carolina Panthers.

An overtime victory against the Romo-less Cowboys got the Eagles to 4-4 and lent credence to the idea that they were still very much alive in the NFC East. And they were, but only because the NFC East was that pathetic.

If the Eagles were anything close to a legitimate contender, they would have beaten Atlanta, Washington, Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit. OK, let’s allow for a poor game here and there. That happens.

The Eagles should have no worse than a 7-4 record. That would have them in first place in the NFC East. Even with tough remaining games against New England (Dec. 6) and Arizona (Dec. 20), the Eagles would be in control of the division race and their own playoff destiny.

Now they are 4-7. Worse, they are coming off two of the worst performances in franchise history. Their losses to Tampa Bay and Detroit, by a combined score of 90-31, have called Kelly’s entire program into question. They were losses of a kind you only saw in franchise-shaking seasons: 1994, when Rich Kotite lost his last seven games; 1998, when Ray Rhodes’ final team went 3-13; 2012, when Andy Reid’s mistakes caught up to him all at once.

They were losses that you would see only when coaches were on their way out the door, losses that forced that door open.

It may be too late for the Eagles to bounce back and win this wretched NFC East title. But there is still time for them to win three or four of their remaining games and remove some of the stench from this horrendous season. There is time for Kelly and his players to leave a more positive impression than they have through their first 11 games.

That shouldn’t be that hard, really. It has been a pretty lousy impression."

Quite the article full of unique statements from Captain Obvious. Don't think anyone is calling them a legitimate contender right now but its nice of him to argue that they aren't one.

Exactly. Just trashes NYG and WAS early by calling them oblivious and 'not any good,' then lambastes the Eagles for being a disappointment.

Lots of direct hate being dished out here.

 

[JuniorNB]

Pretty damning, direct stuff from Phil Sheridan on ESPN:

"The division race appeared to be about the same coming into this season. The Cowboys and the Eagles would compete for the title while Washington and New York played out their schedules in oblivion.

And that’s just what Washington and New York are, two oblivious teams with no business being in the conversation about NFC contenders. That was clear Sunday, as the Giants stumbled around the FedEx Stadium Field and blew their tenuous grip on first place in the division.

It may come down to Washington and New York for the division title, but that’s not because either team has been particularly good. It is because the Eagles and Cowboys have been epic disappointments.

One of those teams has an excuse. Injuries have cost Dallas the services of quarterback Tony Romo for most of the season. Wide receiver Dez Bryant was also out for a long stretch. While that lets Dallas off the hook a bit, it does nothing but make the Eagles’ failure this season look even worse.

Their three-game losing streak -- against Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit -- was only the most dramatic (and most recent) chapter in the Eagles’ story. The reality is, this Eagles team has been inexcusably out of sync since the beginning of the regular season.

They lost their season opener in Atlanta to a team that has lost five of its last six games.

They lost to Dallas at home thanks to one of the most pathetic offensive performances you’ll ever see.

They let Washington drive 90 yards for the game-winning touchdown at FedEx Field.

They were thoroughly outclassed by the Carolina Panthers.

An overtime victory against the Romo-less Cowboys got the Eagles to 4-4 and lent credence to the idea that they were still very much alive in the NFC East. And they were, but only because the NFC East was that pathetic.

If the Eagles were anything close to a legitimate contender, they would have beaten Atlanta, Washington, Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit. OK, let’s allow for a poor game here and there. That happens.

The Eagles should have no worse than a 7-4 record. That would have them in first place in the NFC East. Even with tough remaining games against New England (Dec. 6) and Arizona (Dec. 20), the Eagles would be in control of the division race and their own playoff destiny.

Now they are 4-7. Worse, they are coming off two of the worst performances in franchise history. Their losses to Tampa Bay and Detroit, by a combined score of 90-31, have called Kelly’s entire program into question. They were losses of a kind you only saw in franchise-shaking seasons: 1994, when Rich Kotite lost his last seven games; 1998, when Ray Rhodes’ final team went 3-13; 2012, when Andy Reid’s mistakes caught up to him all at once.

They were losses that you would see only when coaches were on their way out the door, losses that forced that door open.

It may be too late for the Eagles to bounce back and win this wretched NFC East title. But there is still time for them to win three or four of their remaining games and remove some of the stench from this horrendous season. There is time for Kelly and his players to leave a more positive impression than they have through their first 11 games.

That shouldn’t be that hard, really. It has been a pretty lousy impression."

A couple notes. The article was written in a deliberate effort to make things seem worse than they are. We're not a legitimate contender ? Duh. lol What a revelation!

For the Atlanta loss, it claims that it's a weak team that has lost 4 out of 5. But not that they started off 6-0. Slanted journalism. Also says we were 'totally outclassed' by Carolina. Huh? Must have been watching a different game. Bradford threw a potential touchdown pass that bounced off of Huff's hands that would have brought us within a two point conversion of tying them in Carolina. And yes, we let Washington go on a 90 yard drive to win the game. That sucked. Especially after beating the Jets. But he doesn't mention that a missed chip shot field goal is why we lost the game.

As for the current three game losing streak, he actually nailed that. As bad as I can remember this team ever playing. Funny how he essentially gives the Cowboys a free pass for their disaster of a season because they were missing their starting QB for 7 games, but not once mentions that we were using our backup quarterback for those three games.

Eagles do suck this year. But that article is still horse sh!t.

 

[Mighty Mice]

Pretty damning, direct stuff from Phil Sheridan on ESPN:

"The division race appeared to be about the same coming into this season. The Cowboys and the Eagles would compete for the title while Washington and New York played out their schedules in oblivion.

And that’s just what Washington and New York are, two oblivious teams with no business being in the conversation about NFC contenders. That was clear Sunday, as the Giants stumbled around the FedEx Stadium Field and blew their tenuous grip on first place in the division.

It may come down to Washington and New York for the division title, but that’s not because either team has been particularly good. It is because the Eagles and Cowboys have been epic disappointments.

One of those teams has an excuse. Injuries have cost Dallas the services of quarterback Tony Romo for most of the season. Wide receiver Dez Bryant was also out for a long stretch. While that lets Dallas off the hook a bit, it does nothing but make the Eagles’ failure this season look even worse.

Their three-game losing streak -- against Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit -- was only the most dramatic (and most recent) chapter in the Eagles’ story. The reality is, this Eagles team has been inexcusably out of sync since the beginning of the regular season.

They lost their season opener in Atlanta to a team that has lost five of its last six games.

They lost to Dallas at home thanks to one of the most pathetic offensive performances you’ll ever see.

They let Washington drive 90 yards for the game-winning touchdown at FedEx Field.

They were thoroughly outclassed by the Carolina Panthers.

An overtime victory against the Romo-less Cowboys got the Eagles to 4-4 and lent credence to the idea that they were still very much alive in the NFC East. And they were, but only because the NFC East was that pathetic.

If the Eagles were anything close to a legitimate contender, they would have beaten Atlanta, Washington, Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit. OK, let’s allow for a poor game here and there. That happens.

The Eagles should have no worse than a 7-4 record. That would have them in first place in the NFC East. Even with tough remaining games against New England (Dec. 6) and Arizona (Dec. 20), the Eagles would be in control of the division race and their own playoff destiny.

Now they are 4-7. Worse, they are coming off two of the worst performances in franchise history. Their losses to Tampa Bay and Detroit, by a combined score of 90-31, have called Kelly’s entire program into question. They were losses of a kind you only saw in franchise-shaking seasons: 1994, when Rich Kotite lost his last seven games; 1998, when Ray Rhodes’ final team went 3-13; 2012, when Andy Reid’s mistakes caught up to him all at once.

They were losses that you would see only when coaches were on their way out the door, losses that forced that door open.

It may be too late for the Eagles to bounce back and win this wretched NFC East title. But there is still time for them to win three or four of their remaining games and remove some of the stench from this horrendous season. There is time for Kelly and his players to leave a more positive impression than they have through their first 11 games.

That shouldn’t be that hard, really. It has been a pretty lousy impression."

A couple notes. The article was written in a deliberate effort to make things seem worse than they are. We're not a legitimate contender ? Duh. lol What a revelation!

For the Atlanta loss, it claims that it's a weak team that has lost 4 out of 5. But not that they started off 6-0. Slanted journalism. Also says we were 'totally outclassed' by Carolina. Huh? Must have been watching a different game. Bradford threw a potential touchdown pass that bounced off of Huff's hands that would have brought us within a two point conversion of tying them in Carolina. And yes, we let Washington go on a 90 yard drive to win the game. That sucked. Especially after beating the Jets. But he doesn't mention that a missed chip shot field goal is why we lost the game.

As for the current three game losing streak, he actually nailed that. As bad as I can remember this team ever playing. Funny how he essentially gives the Cowboys a free pass for their disaster of a season because they were missing their starting QB for 7 games, but not once mentions that we were using our backup quarterback for those three games.

Eagles do suck this year. But that article is still horse ####.

Don't disagree with you much, if at all... just what caught my eye today and what the mainstream media spin is, heading into week 13.

Ready for a trip to Foxboro to produce more of the above-type journalistic pieces?

 

[JuniorNB]

Pretty damning, direct stuff from Phil Sheridan on ESPN:

"The division race appeared to be about the same coming into this season. The Cowboys and the Eagles would compete for the title while Washington and New York played out their schedules in oblivion.

And that’s just what Washington and New York are, two oblivious teams with no business being in the conversation about NFC contenders. That was clear Sunday, as the Giants stumbled around the FedEx Stadium Field and blew their tenuous grip on first place in the division.

It may come down to Washington and New York for the division title, but that’s not because either team has been particularly good. It is because the Eagles and Cowboys have been epic disappointments.

One of those teams has an excuse. Injuries have cost Dallas the services of quarterback Tony Romo for most of the season. Wide receiver Dez Bryant was also out for a long stretch. While that lets Dallas off the hook a bit, it does nothing but make the Eagles’ failure this season look even worse.

Their three-game losing streak -- against Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit -- was only the most dramatic (and most recent) chapter in the Eagles’ story. The reality is, this Eagles team has been inexcusably out of sync since the beginning of the regular season.

They lost their season opener in Atlanta to a team that has lost five of its last six games.

They lost to Dallas at home thanks to one of the most pathetic offensive performances you’ll ever see.

They let Washington drive 90 yards for the game-winning touchdown at FedEx Field.

They were thoroughly outclassed by the Carolina Panthers.

An overtime victory against the Romo-less Cowboys got the Eagles to 4-4 and lent credence to the idea that they were still very much alive in the NFC East. And they were, but only because the NFC East was that pathetic.

If the Eagles were anything close to a legitimate contender, they would have beaten Atlanta, Washington, Miami, Tampa Bay and Detroit. OK, let’s allow for a poor game here and there. That happens.

The Eagles should have no worse than a 7-4 record. That would have them in first place in the NFC East. Even with tough remaining games against New England (Dec. 6) and Arizona (Dec. 20), the Eagles would be in control of the division race and their own playoff destiny.

Now they are 4-7. Worse, they are coming off two of the worst performances in franchise history. Their losses to Tampa Bay and Detroit, by a combined score of 90-31, have called Kelly’s entire program into question. They were losses of a kind you only saw in franchise-shaking seasons: 1994, when Rich Kotite lost his last seven games; 1998, when Ray Rhodes’ final team went 3-13; 2012, when Andy Reid’s mistakes caught up to him all at once.

They were losses that you would see only when coaches were on their way out the door, losses that forced that door open.

It may be too late for the Eagles to bounce back and win this wretched NFC East title. But there is still time for them to win three or four of their remaining games and remove some of the stench from this horrendous season. There is time for Kelly and his players to leave a more positive impression than they have through their first 11 games.

That shouldn’t be that hard, really. It has been a pretty lousy impression."

A couple notes. The article was written in a deliberate effort to make things seem worse than they are. We're not a legitimate contender ? Duh. lol What a revelation!

For the Atlanta loss, it claims that it's a weak team that has lost 4 out of 5. But not that they started off 6-0. Slanted journalism. Also says we were 'totally outclassed' by Carolina. Huh? Must have been watching a different game. Bradford threw a potential touchdown pass that bounced off of Huff's hands that would have brought us within a two point conversion of tying them in Carolina. And yes, we let Washington go on a 90 yard drive to win the game. That sucked. Especially after beating the Jets. But he doesn't mention that a missed chip shot field goal is why we lost the game.

As for the current three game losing streak, he actually nailed that. As bad as I can remember this team ever playing. Funny how he essentially gives the Cowboys a free pass for their disaster of a season because they were missing their starting QB for 7 games, but not once mentions that we were using our backup quarterback for those three games.

Eagles do suck this year. But that article is still horse ####.

Don't disagree with you much, if at all... just what caught my eye today and what the mainstream media spin is, heading into week 13.

Ready for a trip to Foxboro to produce more of the above-type journalistic pieces?

The only plus is that New England has destroyed almost everyone they've played this year. Unlike Tampa Bay and Detroit. People thought we'd win those games. No one is expecting us to even stay within single digits in this one.

 

[ShaHBucks]

We can argue QB's until we die--none of them will matter if we have such a poor set of weapons....none of them can be truly judged either because of that and the offense Chip wants to run. In our offense the QB can't read the D for long pre-snap or make any audibles. Theyre already going in limited because of that and when you add our talent at WR and TE they will all seem average to below average

And then you watch the Patriots opporate like a machine and adjust to personnel accordingly.

Yep, and what's odd about this is when Chip came the big thing was that he adapts to the personnel he has.... and over the past 3 years he has become more and more set in his ways.

In hindsight, everyone is gone that didn't fit the system/culture. Shady dancing, Foles throwing contested deep balls, Djax thug'in it out, C. Williams loud mouth...

 

[Mighty Mice]

On Tuesday, the NFL reportedly decided to remove Pete Morelli's refereeing crew from the Sunday Night Football matchup because of egregious errors made in the Week 12 game between the Cardinals and 49ers. The crew was then reassigned to the Eagles' game against the Patriots this Sunday.

 

[Mighty Mice]

Mathews still not back at practice, in the concussion protocol. Going to miss a 3rd straight game. :(

Averaging 105 ypg rushing w/o him. 155 ypg rushing with him.