Promote your business or product on 700level.com. For
more information about advertising with us CLICK HERE!

"AND they have since made moves to add depth and stability to their team (while the other teams have DONE NOTHING), I dont see how you can sit here and say the FO is fucking this thing up."

Take two: we're not saying they "fucked it up".

The rest of your post has been addressed previously, as well.

Agreed KB, a bit repatitious. We will agree to disagree.

By the way, I'm not unhappy with the off-season as it has unfolded so far. I don't think they're "net behind".

What I think is they are about as good as they were last year, as of today, and I don't think they were all that good last year.

I think they were a pretty average team that got hot around a great offensive line and a historically fragile back who was able to tough out a whole year. I love Westbrook, but if Vegas wouldn't lay odds on him staying healthy this year and his backup has a piece of coat hanger for a knee.

Still, the offense is the LEAST of my worries. As long as FB continues with the 50/50 (give or take 5%) in the play calling, that offense will be fine. They have plenty of capable pass catchers, a QB capable of lighting up a D, and a running back who is one of the most difficult players in the league to defend. Their O-line is great and should only get better this year.

The problem for me is the defense.

They entered the off-season knowing Defense was a huge, glaring hole for this team. Their best player on D (Dawk) is another year older. Their only playmaker (Lito) is hurt all the time. Their nickel back from the last 4 years is gone.

Their D-line is terrible on most days and they are counting on a 30 year old guy with 1 eye, a 30 year old speed rusher on one knee, and a 2nd year top pick at DT who's most notable contribution to the Eagles so far was supposed to be getting fried chicken before a flight...and he missed the flight.

Fuck...we haven't even talked about the Backers yet, have we?

Hey, I want Kearse to be 100%. I want Bunkley to look like the beast he was in college. I want Trent Cole to play the whole season without wearing down. I want Howard to be the guy he appeared to be in the pre-season and first couple weeks of the season. I want Patterson to penetrate and screw up the offense's timing. I want Gocong to be a playing 260 lb. SAM backer. I want McCoy to be a all over the field on third annoying the offense on 3rd downs. I want Gaither to be a find at the weakside spot. I want Trot to lose 15 and appear 5 years younger.

I want a lot of good things to happen for the Eagles. I just don't know if we can expect them.

Keep in mind, I think they can win the division and go the playoffs with this team (after the draft). I'm not not thrilled with their prospects after that and if you look at your team and say "We can probably compete with the top teams in the NFC", it's back to the fucking drawing board, IMO.

Fd, what teams in the NFC can you give that same articulate(well done,and true) speil, with dif. Positions? Bears(qb, wr,te,oline) for sure, new orleans(dline, lb's, db`s). That being said, you had some very good points. It is such a shame about kearse. He looked incredible last year b4 the ACL, and i have NO IDEA what the hell he will look like.

They're not "net behind" but they aren't ahead at all.

Kearse is unlikely to stay healthy all season. The fact that the pass rush suffered as much as it did was disturbing. Futhermore, the "rotating" line is a nice idea, but some teams are more commonly employing a no-huddle that will negate the benefit of having rested DTs. They will wear down and they have. Patterson and Bunkley are big question marks in terms of what to expect. Consistency and quality haven't even been determined.

The secondary needs depth both a 4th CB and safety. A new LB that can cover would be crucial. LJ is still inconsistent at TE.

Blah blah blah.

FA is ok, but the Birds could have kept Stallworth and the reason I think people refer to Curtis as a ? is that his chemistry with McNabb is undetermined. McNabb trusted and relied on both Stallworth and TO. Before them, it was Stumbles. Curtis is an unknown entity in that regard, not necessarily his measurable skills.

I didn't follow FA that closely, but I was hoping for more action.

Problem is, the Eagles rarely get significantly better in an offseason. They progress or regress depending on a few factors. If they stay healthy, they are generally a good team, but since they fail to address key factors that keep them from becoming a level better. What I've learned is that it's no longer really about players with the Eagles. They'll either be decent or fall off the map. Since no one is taking Super Bowl any longer with this team I guess it's safe to say that the window has closed on them being a contending team as presently put together.

I couldn't disagree with you more. Their Dline is not as bad as you think. I believe they were top 10 in sacks

And how good were they against the run?

And how well did they stop New Orleans' rushing attack when they needed to in the playoff loss?

Actually, how well have they ever stopped the opponent's rushing attack in a playoff loss?

It's awfully strange because the Eagles have had one very obvious weakness over the last 7 or so years (defense against the run) yet each offseason they do nothing to improve on that weakness. Wait, that's not true. They do draft and occasionally trade for or sign undersized defensive players, even though logic tells you that undersized players have a harder time stopping the run. Funny how logic keeps beating the Eagles in the playoffs every...single...year.

To quote Philly fav Ben Franklin, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

That being said, the Eagles might not insane because the revenue$ continue to grow.

And I could care less about merely keeping pace with the rest of the NFC. Would you really be excited to see your heart ripped out again when the Eagles lose to a superior team (with a gameplan for winning NOW) on Super Bowl Sunday? I'll pass on that.

If they aren't making any attempt to compete with Indy or New England, there's no reason to get excited about this team unless you manage Lurie's investment portfolio.

It's been said a million times, but this organization has had only one year when they truly tried to win the whole thing, and not by some coincidence, 2004 took them as far as they've gone in many, many seasons. If only they'd continued trying to win right up until the game ended...

Meanwhile, New England is bulking up for a big run. There's such an obvious contrast between owners Bob Kraft, not content with a mere 3 Lombardi trophies, and Jeffrey Lurie, content with consistent profits and solid economic growth.

BD

also couldnt disagree more


i think they still win the NFC East. on paper, they have the best OL in the NFC and their skill players on offense rank up with the conf best.

on defense, getting kearse back is big. as long as they replace banjo guy and trotter stays healthy, i think the defense is a def. upgrade over '06. add 1-2 june 1st signings and a couple of draft picks and the D is even stronger and deeper.

in ref to reagor, i think that spells the end of either walker or rayburn's reign here in phila.

as it stands now,

DE is pretty set, juqua, freak, howard and cole

DT ..patterson, reagor, bunkley, ramsey and either walker of truck driver

or truck driver

It's been said a million times, but this organization has had only one year when they truly tried to win the whole thing, and not by some coincidence, 2004 took them as far as they've gone in many, many seasons. If only they'd continued trying to win right up until the game ended...

talon I gotta call you on your lack of logical reasoning... EITHER the Eagles have truly tried to win the whole thing or they didn't, you can't have it both ways... in your 2nd to last post you statedIt's awfully strange because the Eagles have had one very obvious weakness over the last 7 or so years (defense against the run) yet each offseason they do nothing to improve on that weakness. Wait, that's not true. They do draft and occasionally trade for or sign undersized defensive players, even though logic tells you that undersized players have a harder time stopping the run. Funny how logic keeps beating the Eagles in the playoffs every...single...year.

so what's different between '04 and the other 6 years, TO basicly is the only REAL difference, Kearse is still on the team, hurt but still on the team, so "they truly tried to win the whole thing" in '04 but they didn't really do anything other than get Kearse and since he is still on the team BUT the rest of the defense is still basically the same...

I'm not really sure why you seem to love picking on the FO because they not only want to make money but they do a dam good job AND they are still winning... I'm not saying the D doesn't need to step up their run defense, but I think you're over reacting a little, the D was horrid against the run, but the first half of the season they lost 93, and if memory serves me Dawkins was the only member of the secondary that was able to stay healthy... it's a team sport and when you have to substitute 3-5 2nd-3rd string players in the other players attempt to do more then their roles and get out of position, once #5 went down the team leaders got together and put a stop to the guys playing out of position, and the team as a whole got healthier...

I of course expect you to just laugh my comments off as I am a self professed Kool-aide drinker, but you have to addmit there is a good bit of truth to everything I've just said.

I couldn't disagree with you more. Their Dline is not as bad as you think. I believe they were top 10 in sacks

Speaking ONLY to that comment, that's a bit of a bogus stat.

The Eagles D-line (by itself) had 32 sacks last year which was 4th among all D-lines in the league.

However:

They had 12 sacks from the d-line after 2 games. Obviously, that's an average of 6 per game.

They had 21 sacks from the d-line after 5 games (that included 3 games without Kearse). That's still an impressive average of over 4 per game.

In the final 11 games of the season, they managed 11 total sacks from the d-line and 2 of them came in the meaningless finale against the Falcons.

Again, this is pretty easy math, but not only did they get TRUCKED by the run game, but they couldn't get to the QB for the majority of the season. And it's not as though they were just not getting home...there was very little pressure.

I know this has pretty much been talked about adnausium but I just watched about half of Curtis' hit's tape on PE.com and he looked good of course. Somethings I noticed, yes he's small but dam he is fast, (not sure if that was last year or through his entire career) but he had beaten two defenders so badly they had to tackle him prior to the ball getting there it'll be nice having that kind of speed back on the field. the other thing I noticed was that although he has a rep for avoiding contact and going down early, I didn't see as much of that as I might have thought. several times he fought for the extra yard(s)to get a first down, taking hits along the way... St Louis also threw the WR screen to him a lot(NOW I SEE, that play is actually suposed to GAIN yardage)

Anyway I was already pretty happy with his signing and watching about half that footage made me all that more sure he should have a pretty good year, I'd be willing to bet he has a better year than Donte has in NE...

I couldn't disagree with you more. Their Dline is not as bad as you think. I believe they were top 10 in sacks

The other thing to remember is that sacks don't always show how good/bad a defensive line is, nor should they (by themselves) be used as a stat to support a team's line.

To bring this back to a post I had stated earlier, here's the llink:

So the Texans gave up two spots in the draft, their second rounders for this year and next year, for a backup QB who's best noted as being below average, and who's not better than the QB they have in their system now.

This is bad comedy.

Shocker- I totally disagree here.

I think Carr is toast, Schaub has serious upside, they only moved down 2 spots but remain in the top ten, and gave up 2 2nds-

If it turns out that the guy under a very good offensive mind, btw, can play at a level I think he's capable, and obviously they think he can, with QB bein at such a premium in the league due to the Harringtons, Carrs, Cleveland QB Du Jour, etc, then they robbed the Falcons.

Vick is crap, and the Falcons will sink with him and just mortgaged their only shot to unload the cat and thus, deserve what they get. Arthur Blank's a motard.

I honestly thought there was HALF a chance that w/ the new regime in Atl., they'd allow Vick to struggle with the 'system' (Read: Play as he has all along) and use that as grounds from a PR basis, to sit him, go with Schaub, and pave Vick's exit outta town with less of a fan outcry next offseason.

Tho how much of an outcry would there be, given that he flipped em all off last December? Anyway- I think Atlanta's run by Dick Dasterdly from Laff Olympics and his man-crush on Vick has just sunk their ship for the foreseeable future.

Honestly, what has everyone seen out of Matt Schaub that suggests he has a bright future?

I think Carr is better than Schaub, BUT I think he was done in Houston. If there were different circumstances it'd be something else, but I do agree that the Carr Era (or whatever) is done in Houston.

I see what you're saying - essentially they gave up 2 spots and two 2nd rd picks for someone that they're thinking will turn out to be a better version of DelHomme. I think that the price was just too high, and that he could've been gotten for a while for a 3rd.

Kubiak couldn't do much with Carr, but I think someone else could. He could end up being somewhat better than reclamation project Harrington.

Still, he could've been gotten with less than what the Texans gave up, and I'm wondering if they were in a bidding war against themselves.

KeithByars
RE: Player Movement/Rumor Thread
3/22/2007 8:48 AM

Honestly, what has everyone seen out of Matt Schaub that suggests he has a bright future?






I guess it IS easy to look good as an actual NFL QUARTERBACK when you're main competition in town is a Herpes infected "Slash".

It could be that I just watched the Falcons without Capn Valtrex and the offense looked better, the stable of WRs on whom theyve invested a few No.1's actually looked good, and the offense never suffered, some would say, it was better. (some= anyone with a clue).

I think they overpaid.

If Shaub turns into Brees or someone on that level, it's a fair deal. However, the guy doesn't have much of an NFL track record and 2 high seconds plus 2 spots in the top 10? They must be banking on the fact tht no other teams in from of hem will be taking Peterson and it "doesn't matter anyway", but they'll be up shit creek if someone leapfrogs them.

Honestly, Schaub has less of an NFL track record and has been less productive that AJ Feeley was when the Eagles dealt him to the Fins.

I like him, but that's a steep price for a 26 year old "prospect" with 1 career start and a 69 career QB rating...

No one questions whether or not Schaub is a better "quarterback" than Mexico. But we all know who Atl's tied their horse and cart to.

The question here is why did they give up so much for someone that could've been gotten for less, especially since the Texans need help elsewhere. And some QBs have looked good in relief but then horrible for the long haul.

This isn't the Louisiana Purchase featuring Herschel Walker, but it's a high price to pay for an unproven QB.

I like him, but that's a steep price for a 26 year old "prospect" with 1 career start and a 69 career QB rating...

Seriously. I'd have thought 1 second round pick would be fair.

Im not debating that Atlanta TECHNICALLY did well by the return on Schaub, Im sayin their screwed cos unless they have somethin else in the future mapped out QB-wise, this new staff in place down there's stuck with Vick and you cannot win with Kordell Lite- just swap the Facial growths for the Herpes.

Cannot
Win
With
Vick.

As for The Texans, we'll see what he can do with Schaub, I DO think as i said he has potential, enuff to make this deal a fair one. But as it stands now, I can see why people are questioning the price paid. But if they wanted HIM and not just an available guy like Trent Green, then its worth it.

The value of something is what someone else is willing to pay. Thats all Im sayin. Atlanta didnt HAVE to move Schaub, so to get him, they had to pay a hiked price and at least at this point, they're obviously alright with it.

Atlanta got a lot, and they have extra picks to decide what to do about the QB situation.

In Schaub, we're talking about a guy that has only completed half of his passes, and has as many INT's as TD's. I just don't know how any opinion can be formed about him, yet

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57