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.
And assuming Lawrence and Fields go - if we don't go QB - we'll have a top3 non-QB pick.
5-12 41.7% 109 yards 9.1 YPA 1 TD 1 INT 67.7 Rating 5 carries for 29 yards
If not Surtain it better be Chase or Smith at WR.
Far from a lock. We aren't even sitting at a top 5 pick right now. If we win 1 game, we are out of the top 10.
Far? We MIGHT be favored in one more game this season.
Yes. A "lock" insinuates that it is a done deal, and 100%. Even if you put the odds of us winning each of the next games at 15% (this is pretty low especially considering you said we'd be maybe favoured in one), the odds of us going 0-4 are only 50%. So yes, it is FAR from a "lock" that we go 0-4.
Ok give me the percentage odds you think we win each game.
As much as I think these are a bit low, even with the odds you gave, that gives us a 52% chance going 0-4. I would love a top 5 pick, but 52% is not remotely close to a lock.
Sure. That's fine. It's not good, it's not bad. He's a 2nd round rookie taking his first non-gadget snaps without even a preseason. Anyone saying that they want to see Hurts play to 'see what they have in him' is sorely mistaken. You won't. He'll struggle without question. That's fine and expected.
Depends how Mailata looks these next few weeks, but if we get to #3 we absolutely could take Sewell.
The Foles takes are always dumb. We caught lightning in a bottle, but even when he was here he was inconsistent as heck. The only argument that we should have kept Foles is that it would have been cheaper, and it would have meant we would have traded Wentz for probably a 1st.
We probably should anyway. Lane has major injuries every year. How much longer does he have in the league?
0%
You followed me around this board trolling me. I'm not trolling through. I just came back for one victory lap. Enjoy. I really like Hurts work ethic. I hope he succeeds.
This is just pure exaggeration. Nothing is 0 percent. You prob would have put the Giants beating the Hawks at 0 too. And 15 percent against Dallas when you said we could possibly even be favoured?
It's not near that bad, but it's not good. It's probably like 25% Saints, 35% Cards, 50% Cowboys, 40% WFT. Give or take 5-10% on the last 3 based on how next game goes.
This is much more accurate.
Deamon said:
We’re not watching the same team.babydemon90 said:
Nothing is 0 percent. I think they have at least a 1 in 20 shot to beat all of those teams.
babydemon90 said:
i don't think this can be emphasized enough. It is strange, but it seems that Wentz locks on one player and makes his throw, and doesn't see the whole field. I would love to watch some game film of him from the '17 season to see if this was significantly different then. But this point was so evident the game against Seattle when you would see WRs running patterns wide open, and Wentz never looked their way. by the 2nd half, you heard the commentators talking about how the WRs got no separation off the line, but i am 99% sure they didn't because why would they if they knew they were not going to get thrown the ball
No, but saying there is a 0 percent chance we win seems extreme. Wouldn't you throw your life savings on these games even at a low return if you believed this?
I listen to this guy from North Dakota who fits this description pretty well.The Noid said:
If we assume the Eagles are 15% to win for each of the last 4 games, then it's about a coin flip as to whether the eagles go 0-4 vs getting at least one win. I think they're a minimum of 15% against each of those teams (and significantly higher against the Cardinals, Cowboys and Football Team). I think the Eagles get at least one more win this year. I know there is no reason to be optimistic but some of those teams are also very flawed (maybe just as flawed as the Eagles).
Bad coaching can kill good players. Anyone who’s watched the NFL 5+ years has seen this hundreds of times already.
was it Reich leaving?
This is where we are all different. I have no clue how you can watch this team and assume 15% without using Hail Mary logic.
I’m basing it solely on how bad I think Washington and Dallas are. I don’t think Dallas would beat the Eagles 8-9 out of 10 times. They’re both putrid.
15% is low. We are still saying the same as you, that we will likely lose each game. Saying 0% is illogical... there's definitely a chance to win each game. You call it 'hail mary logic", but what is wrong with that? I think you're underestimating how low 10% is... never once disagreed we are bad or will be underdogs in all of those games, but saying absolutely 0% chance we beat the Cardinals or WFT is just exaggerating for attention.
