What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

*Official 2016 Philadelphia Eagles* - The year of Change (1 Viewer)

I expect McDermott to get a HC gig this offseason - just which team. Great turnaround for the guy, after being fired here (obviously we were too quick on the hook on that one)

 
McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.

I can't remember if it was in the old thread or some where on the board but I was reading about McDermott's player evaluation skills. He was saying how Josh Norman was considered a hot head that was trying too hard during the senior bowl which was driving his value way down. Sean saw something in practice though that caught his eye and he suggested to the staff they draft the kid, which they did in the 5th round.

He's a players coach and he has the requisite skills for the game. His personality is also one that I think finds a way to disarm who he talks to instead of trying to bully them. So I can see him being a good fit with the Front office also. I think he'd be my top candidate. Just can't finalize anything till they are out.

 
McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.
McDermott was fired after 2010 to make way for Castillo to take over the defense. Isn't that when Washburn was brought in with this "wide 9" scheme? That was the undoing of Andy Reid or at least the beginning of the end.

 
No doubt a disappointing season. After being excited for Chip it fell apart very quick.

On to bigger and better. I would like a tougher team. Less flash more hit you in the mouth. I think this style is less dependent on talent and is sustainable. Also this is the style that has been proven more often then not to be productive in the playoffs.

Fly Eagles Fly !!!

 
Todd Haley had his problems in K.C and was kind of Chip Kelly light but he overcame some obstacles in Pitt and is now a fan favorite when even Big Ben didn't want him intially. Great passing game and Hall had an amazing year as a backup when everyone thought he was washed up. Don't see why we don't at least bring him in for an interview.
Ive read things about Haley and his ego/pompous attitude. Do not want.

 
Sean McDermott would be a welcome addition in my opinion. He's on 975 the fanatic right now and, man he gets it. Interesting sidenote, since McDermitt became defensive Cordinator and Carolina five years ago they're the only team to finish in the top 10 defensively each year since.
Yes!! Just wrapping up! Man I'd take him with Shermerbas OC and keep Bradford. This would be awesome. Just think about what Kurt Coleman was here and what he's done in Carolina.
I agree. That's a combination I'd be happy with. Was listening to a few players last night and they all seem to like Shermer. Not sure McDermott wouldn't have his own guy in mind for OC, but the prospect of McDermott/Shermer/Bradford being here next year is exciting.
My only concern with McDermott is if his success in Carolina is based off of talent and not his coaching.

 
McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.
McDermott was fired after 2010 to make way for Castillo to take over the defense. Isn't that when Washburn was brought in with this "wide 9" scheme? That was the undoing of Andy Reid or at least the beginning of the end.
Ah yes. Got my Andy guys mixed up. Sean was still the scapegoat for a subpar defensive year if I recall. Wasn't that Vick's crazy season but we lost at home to GB?

 
I expect McDermott to get a HC gig this offseason - just which team. Great turnaround for the guy, after being fired here (obviously we were too quick on the hook on that one)
Im not sure ... he looked lost at the time. His time wasnt then, though it could be now.

 
Sean McDermott would be a welcome addition in my opinion. He's on 975 the fanatic right now and, man he gets it. Interesting sidenote, since McDermitt became defensive Cordinator and Carolina five years ago they're the only team to finish in the top 10 defensively each year since.
Yes!! Just wrapping up! Man I'd take him with Shermerbas OC and keep Bradford. This would be awesome. Just think about what Kurt Coleman was here and what he's done in Carolina.
I agree. That's a combination I'd be happy with. Was listening to a few players last night and they all seem to like Shermer. Not sure McDermott wouldn't have his own guy in mind for OC, but the prospect of McDermott/Shermer/Bradford being here next year is exciting.
My only concern with McDermott is if his success in Carolina is based off of talent and not his coaching.
He played a part in bringing in that talent.

 
I'd like us to resign Thurmond - he seemed to do a great job at manning the other safety spot. I don't think we were bashing our safeties near as often this year as in the past - hopefully he would come reasonably priced though.

Edit: although listening to his comments, he's not going to give us a discount - he may price himself out here.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.
McDermott was fired after 2010 to make way for Castillo to take over the defense. Isn't that when Washburn was brought in with this "wide 9" scheme? That was the undoing of Andy Reid or at least the beginning of the end.
Ah yes. Got my Andy guys mixed up. Sean was still the scapegoat for a subpar defensive year if I recall. Wasn't that Vick's crazy season but we lost at home to GB?
I do think that there may have been a little bit of scapegoating. McDermott's defenses started out great here, then kind of went downhill. But that may or may not have been totally his fault in the end.

 
McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.

I can't remember if it was in the old thread or some where on the board but I was reading about McDermott's player evaluation skills. He was saying how Josh Norman was considered a hot head that was trying too hard during the senior bowl which was driving his value way down. Sean saw something in practice though that caught his eye and he suggested to the staff they draft the kid, which they did in the 5th round.

He's a players coach and he has the requisite skills for the game. His personality is also one that I think finds a way to disarm who he talks to instead of trying to bully them. So I can see him being a good fit with the Front office also. I think he'd be my top candidate. Just can't finalize anything till they are out.
Kind of where I am as well, as I'd like to see a defensive minded guy in the fold overseeing the projected moved back to a 4-3 base. Let him bring in whoever he likes as DC to help obviously.

Lurie says he wants a guy familiar with Philadelphia and the unique opportunity of coaching here - check

Lurie hinted at a 'return to Reid era' in terms of approach - check

Also, McDermott worked with Shurmur on the Philadelphia staff under Andy. Love to see them work together again and keep Shurmur to run the offense, keeping Bradford in the fold to grow with JMatt and Ertz.

We'll see. Gase is in town today, Marrone on deck. A few others lined up.

 
A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.

 
A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
Your not wrong, the team wasn't that good and completely underperformed. That said, I like many offensive pieces we have here, and would like to see some resources used to upgrade the OLine and keep continuity. IMO Shurmur gives us the best chance to keep that continuity, and showed ability (albeit in 1 game) to slow the tempo a bit, audible, put the QB under center, play action, fake the quick throw to the TE and them handoff on a delay, etc. IMO the same offensive personnel in a WCO-type system could be a top-10 offense (provided the line is addressed). More than keeping Shurmur, I am hoping they keep Bradford and let him gel with the young WRs. Don't see another QB option unless we completely rebuild, and I don't think we need that.

Defensively I'm of the mind we need to switch to a 4-3, retain Curry and extend Cox, and bring in new coaches. A switch in offensive scheme/tempo will help, but a change is needed. I like McDermott from his time here and especially what he has done in Carolina.

We'll see. I could be way off base here. Who knows what Jeff will do. I hope it's the right call, whatever it is.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.
McDermott was fired after 2010 to make way for Castillo to take over the defense. Isn't that when Washburn was brought in with this "wide 9" scheme? That was the undoing of Andy Reid or at least the beginning of the end.
Chronology was actually McDermott fired -> Washburn hired as D-Line coach -> Castillo promoted to DC.

Andy made McDermott the scapegoat for 2010, but recommended him to Carolina. He then decided that he wanted to implement the wide 9 and hired Washburn. Then he went looking for a DC, and no established guy would take the job because they didn't want to be forced into running the wide 9. So he promoted someone who would agree to run it, Castillo.

 
Would like:

Gase

H. Jackson

McDermott

Payton if the price wasn't too steep

Don't mind either way on:

T. Austin

Koetter

Shurmur

Staley

Do not want:

Haley

Marrone

McDaniels or anyone else from the Belichick coaching tree

Shanahan

Other retreads who have been gone forever (Gruden, Cowher, etc.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hope whoever we get has had some nfl HC exp and success. After firing chip, I don't see any way they give it to schumur. They need some kind of splash after that turd season

 
Sean McDermott joined the 97.5 the Fanatic morning show Tuesday and indicated that he does have some interest in the Eagles head coaching job.

“Oh yeah, I mean, we love it here, living in Carolina it’s been great being here five years. But yeah, we’re always interested,” he said. “I love the Philadelphia area and quite honestly it’s been tough to watch the last several years, having grown up in the area and worked there for 12 years. The fan base, I know it’s important to them; they’re genuine, they’re dedicated and they’re real. And the facilities up there are second to none. I’d love to see the Eagles recapture the magic so to speak.”

The La Salle College High School product and Jim Johnson pupil oversees a Carolina defense that finished the regular season first in takeaways (39) and sixth in both yards against and points per game (19.3). His unit has finished in the top 10 in opponent yards in four of his five seasons as defensive coordinator in Carolina.

McDermott's name has been a popular one as multiple teams -- including the Eagles -- search for a new head coach. But to this point, the Eagles have not submitted an interview request. When asked if the team had reached out in any way, McDermott politely declined to comment and said his agent was handling that.

The 41-year-old was with the Eagles organization from 1999-2010, starting as a scouting administrative coordinator before spending several years as a position coach. He studied under Johnson all the while, and took over as defensive coordinator when his mentor passed.
http://www.phillymag.com/birds247/2016/01/05/mcdermott-wants-eagles-to-recapture-the-magic/#J2uflCLqLcSOgtlB.99
 
Last edited by a moderator:
From BGN:

When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:

"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
From BGN:

When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:

"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
:rolleyes:

 
Why are people against Marrone? Personality? I'm not really holding anything against him for his tenure in Buffalo, record-wise.
Eagles not interested, according to reports: http://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2016/1/5/10717714/eagles-coaching-search-doug-marrone-rumors-jaguars-bills-saints

IMO, personality, yes... but more his decision to opt out of his contract in Buffalo. Abandoned the team. Not a leader.
My perception was that the whole organization was kind of dysfunctional and that's why he wanted out. Really have no idea though, and I guess he is irrelevant anyway at this point.

 
From BGN:

When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:

"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
Wow, the league just put their foot in their mouth. In their effort to promote minority candidates, they just told a minority candidate that he isn't good enough and shouldn't be applying. Nice job.

 
Why are people against Marrone? Personality? I'm not really holding anything against him for his tenure in Buffalo, record-wise.
Terrible personality who feuded with the GM and the media, stormed out of the room when they made the Watkins trade, mismanaged the O-Line (his supposed area of expertise) and the QB situation and ran a boring offense. The success of the team during his tenure was entirely due to the D, which he had nothing to do with.

 
From BGN:

When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:

"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
Wow, the league just put their foot in their mouth. In their effort to promote minority candidates, they just told a minority candidate that he isn't good enough and shouldn't be applying. Nice job.
eh not really

how often does a position coach become a head coach without the coordinator step in between? does anyone think Duce has any chance of getting the job?

 
A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.

makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team

 
From BGN:

When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:

"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
Wow, the league just put their foot in their mouth. In their effort to promote minority candidates, they just told a minority candidate that he isn't good enough and shouldn't be applying. Nice job.
eh not really

how often does a position coach become a head coach without the coordinator step in between? does anyone think Duce has any chance of getting the job?
Uh, Andy Reid down?

 
Whatever happens. please no Shanahan.

I've posted on other threads about his record: top of the NFL with Elway, Davis and Kubiak as OC; Still good with Kubiak as OC; .500 with no playoff appearances in 3 seasons in Denver w/o Kubiak; Losing record with only one winning season and playoff appearence in 4 seasons with the Redskins.

He thinks way to highly of himself and he looks like a rat.

Pass.

 
From BGN:

When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:

"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
Wow, the league just put their foot in their mouth. In their effort to promote minority candidates, they just told a minority candidate that he isn't good enough and shouldn't be applying. Nice job.
eh not really

how often does a position coach become a head coach without the coordinator step in between? does anyone think Duce has any chance of getting the job?
Uh, Andy Reid down?
I didn;t say it NEVER happens, i questioned how often

do you think duce:

1) has any chance at this job

2) will get any other interviews for head coach

 
A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.

makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
I think you're always trying to groom your future quarterback, but at his age, there's no reason Bradford couldn't be the quarterback for ten years. Barring injury, of course. People tend to forget how young Bradford is. They consider him older and Cousins young and they're only 9 months apart. That doesn't mean I don't want them grooming a young quarterback. We all know Bradford's injury history, but if we get play like we did from him the second half of the season and improve our o-line, I think we have a potential top ten guy.

 
From BGN:

When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:

"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
Wow, the league just put their foot in their mouth. In their effort to promote minority candidates, they just told a minority candidate that he isn't good enough and shouldn't be applying. Nice job.
eh not really

how often does a position coach become a head coach without the coordinator step in between? does anyone think Duce has any chance of getting the job?
Uh, Andy Reid down?
I didn;t say it NEVER happens, i questioned how often

do you think duce:

1) has any chance at this job

2) will get any other interviews for head coach
I know. but it has happened 33% of the time under Lurie.

I don't think Duce has any chance at head coach, but I do think he has a chance at OC, if they bring in an offensive minded coach. And part of getting a head coaching job is getting experience in interviewing for a head coaching job. Duce is getting that experience (which he smartly requested). Are the Eagles using Duce to satisfy the Rooney Rule? Probably. Is Duce using the Eagles to get experience interviewing for a Head Coach or OC job? Probably. And obviously the Eagles think something of Duce if they blocked him from going to KC with Reid.

 
A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.

makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
I think you're always trying to groom your future quarterback, but at his age, there's no reason Bradford couldn't be the quarterback for ten years. Barring injury, of course. People tend to forget how young Bradford is. They consider him older and Cousins young and they're only 9 months apart. That doesn't mean I don't want them grooming a young quarterback. We all know Bradford's injury history, but if we get play like we did from him the second half of the season and improve our o-line, I think we have a potential top ten guy.
yeah, I am far from qualified to determine the chances of Bradford getting hurt again, but from my complete unprofessional, layman, opinion, I am concerned. it will be interesting to see how Bradford does with a year of the system under his belt, but I get worried if they tie up a lot of money in him, being that they already have money tied up in a few places and will need to make more room with some good young guys coming up (depending how Mathews and Agholar can look, coming in as early picks may command a high number)

 
From BGN:

When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:

"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.

The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.

However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.

This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
Which is why the rule is stupid. Duce could have been the best candidate for the job in Lurie's mind but due to the color of his skin, he's labeled as the Rooney Rule guy. Just let them interview who they want. If they hire a terrible white coach and their rival hires the better black coach then their loss.Are the owners so afraid of their own deep seeded racist tendencies that they don't think they can hire a black coach fairly?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are the owners so afraid of their own deep seeded racist tendencies that they don't think they can hire a black coach fairly?
More likely afraid of media overreacction and politically motivated accusations if they only interview people of one race, regardless of ability.

We've moved beyond "content of character instead of color of skin" to " content of character after checking all the appropriate demographic boxes."

 
A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.

makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
Mo, keep in mind that Bradford isn't as old as many think he is. He is only 28 and could still have a lot of good football in front of him (assuming his health holds up better than it has in past seasons). Typically speaking, he is the kind of passer that can play longer in the league due to his accuracy and ability in the pocket, with just enough mobility to buy some time when needed (usually within the pocket, not rushing). If he can continue to grasp an offense, read a defense, and make accurate throws he can extend his career like Brees and Palmer have (both 8 years older than him). I'm not saying he is as good as them, but there are years ahead of him for playing if he wants it.

Remember that when he was drafted he was very highly touted. People at the time said he had one of the greatest pre-draft workouts for scouts to date. (I think that had something to do with crazy accuracy that day.) He also has been shuffled between offensive systems so many times that it's hard to judge him and his ability to develop/be groomed as you suggested. I don't know what price I'd be willing to pay to keep him, though. And that means the financial cost as well as the cost of shoehorning a coaching staff in around him as your QB of the future. Just some food for thought.

 
A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.

makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
Mo, keep in mind that Bradford isn't as old as many think he is. He is only 28 and could still have a lot of good football in front of him (assuming his health holds up better than it has in past seasons). Typically speaking, he is the kind of passer that can play longer in the league due to his accuracy and ability in the pocket, with just enough mobility to buy some time when needed (usually within the pocket, not rushing). If he can continue to grasp an offense, read a defense, and make accurate throws he can extend his career like Brees and Palmer have (both 8 years older than him). I'm not saying he is as good as them, but there are years ahead of him for playing if he wants it.

Remember that when he was drafted he was very highly touted. People at the time said he had one of the greatest pre-draft workouts for scouts to date. (I think that had something to do with crazy accuracy that day.) He also has been shuffled between offensive systems so many times that it's hard to judge him and his ability to develop/be groomed as you suggested. I don't know what price I'd be willing to pay to keep him, though. And that means the financial cost as well as the cost of shoehorning a coaching staff in around him as your QB of the future. Just some food for thought.
I think Carson Palmer is the perfect example.

 
A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.

makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
Mo, keep in mind that Bradford isn't as old as many think he is. He is only 28 and could still have a lot of good football in front of him (assuming his health holds up better than it has in past seasons). Typically speaking, he is the kind of passer that can play longer in the league due to his accuracy and ability in the pocket, with just enough mobility to buy some time when needed (usually within the pocket, not rushing). If he can continue to grasp an offense, read a defense, and make accurate throws he can extend his career like Brees and Palmer have (both 8 years older than him). I'm not saying he is as good as them, but there are years ahead of him for playing if he wants it.

Remember that when he was drafted he was very highly touted. People at the time said he had one of the greatest pre-draft workouts for scouts to date. (I think that had something to do with crazy accuracy that day.) He also has been shuffled between offensive systems so many times that it's hard to judge him and his ability to develop/be groomed as you suggested. I don't know what price I'd be willing to pay to keep him, though. And that means the financial cost as well as the cost of shoehorning a coaching staff in around him as your QB of the future. Just some food for thought.
I think Carson Palmer is the perfect example.
any concerns about the rumors of him wanting to retire before Chip signed him? I think we can probably attribute that to the huge frustrations of his injuries and probably not being appreciated in St. Louis, but it would be something I would want to further explore if I was considering him for the next 3-5 years.

and just playing Devil's advocate here. I think the Eagles have a few options. One is they commit to Sam, and probably offer him more than the franchise tag. if they can't sign him for more than 2-3 years I am not sure franchising him makes sense for the only reason to have a starting-caliber QB for next year and bring in someone you want to commit to. I would think this would depend on the coach they bring in too

 
The longer Chips goes without a job the more I believe it was the right decision. Andy lasted all of 1 day before being hired by Kansas City.

 
Conclusion Tim McManus makes after a detailed look at Pat Shurmur:

But Lurie hasn't always made the popular hire, and here he is working in a unique set of (largely self-created) circumstances. He needs someone that can work well with Roseman. He could use a coach that will help convince Bradford to re-up. He needs someone that will connect with this locker room. He prefers someone that understands this organization and this city. And he wouldn't mind if the new era had roots in a successful era of old.

There is much to be weighed and a process still to go through with candidates that could very well dazzle and provide the answers the search committee of Lurie, Roseman and Don Smolenski is seeking.

But Shurmur checks too many boxes to be overlooked altogether.

Read more at http://www.phillymag.com/birds247/2016/01/05/why-pat-shurmur-should-not-be-overlooked/#COB3G3wyFC2VUEU5.99
 
JuniorNB said:
modogg said:
oldmanhawkins said:
A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.

makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
I think you're always trying to groom your future quarterback, but at his age, there's no reason Bradford couldn't be the quarterback for ten years. Barring injury, of course. People tend to forget how young Bradford is. They consider him older and Cousins young and they're only 9 months apart. That doesn't mean I don't want them grooming a young quarterback. We all know Bradford's injury history, but if we get play like we did from him the second half of the season and improve our o-line, I think we have a potential top ten guy.
I don't disagree with the notion that Bradford could be top ten. I was highly impressed with his play and his leadership this season. But that was in chips offense. He has not impressed in other offenses and may or may not be successful in the next. I think it is a potentially franchise ruining mistake to hire the next coach with the offensive coordinator and qb already in place, or to even let that influence your decision on who the best candidate is. Forget Everyone on the team, find the best coach and let him decide his OC and QB.

 
Pip said:
Long Ball Larry said:
Why are people against Marrone? Personality? I'm not really holding anything against him for his tenure in Buffalo, record-wise.
Terrible personality who feuded with the GM and the media, stormed out of the room when they made the Watkins trade, mismanaged the O-Line (his supposed area of expertise) and the QB situation and ran a boring offense. The success of the team during his tenure was entirely due to the D, which he had nothing to do with.
But other than that, Mrs. Lincoln . . .

 
so i know the NFL wouldn't allow this, and it not something done in the NFL as of yet, but let's suppose Bradford doesn't want to sign and he leaves the Eagles (my guess is they franchise him if they have to). But if he does leave, we can all agree they really have pretty crappy options. I have revisited my idea of grabbing a QB if the value isn't there, and am wondering what would happen if the Eagles chose to "tank".

i don't think they would be allowed to, and it isn't as easy as it can be in the NBA, but i think this would be the best option for them. however, if they were to put themselves in a position to get a top 3 pick, it would seem to set them up real nice with the ability to grab a top young QB next year (i would have to think there would be at least one QB that can be viewed as an NFL QB). I'm sure this would be looked at pretty harshly, and would be a tough sell to the veteran players, especially those with maybe only a few years left, but as a 1 year plan would this not be the most feasible option?

P.S. I think i already miss football, even without absolutely atrocious this year was for the Eagles :(

 
so i know the NFL wouldn't allow this, and it not something done in the NFL as of yet, but let's suppose Bradford doesn't want to sign and he leaves the Eagles (my guess is they franchise him if they have to). But if he does leave, we can all agree they really have pretty crappy options. I have revisited my idea of grabbing a QB if the value isn't there, and am wondering what would happen if the Eagles chose to "tank".

i don't think they would be allowed to, and it isn't as easy as it can be in the NBA, but i think this would be the best option for them. however, if they were to put themselves in a position to get a top 3 pick, it would seem to set them up real nice with the ability to grab a top young QB next year (i would have to think there would be at least one QB that can be viewed as an NFL QB). I'm sure this would be looked at pretty harshly, and would be a tough sell to the veteran players, especially those with maybe only a few years left, but as a 1 year plan would this not be the most feasible option?

P.S. I think i already miss football, even without absolutely atrocious this year was for the Eagles :(
You'll just never sell this to existing players. Too short of a season, and too many quick turnarounds happen. Going from 7-9 to a contender can and has happened in a year.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top