PDA

View Full Version : Philadelphia Eagles Discussion


Pages : 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

Dillen
02-19-2007, 11:10 AM
but if they do get a Ilaoa and gave Westbrook 20-25 carries a game and Ilaoa about 5, I think the Eagles would go undefeated :D
The run game is very low on the list of problems. They would hardly be any better with that 'much needed big back.'

No, nobody has ever mentioned this concept before. Do you also think we need a run-stuffing DT? Perhaps you want to cut McDougle as well?

... sometimes I just can't take it anymore :evil:
Um...a run stuffing DT and cutting McDougle definitely need to be discussed. I think we need to discuss why you dont want to cut McDougle.

But agreed, people need to shut their damn mouth about having a big RB.

mpt117
02-19-2007, 01:59 PM
alright if anyone saw espns prep for the nfl draft on sportscenter and the description for the senior bowl from scott...brian leonard is trying to be a RB...he is 224 lbs...early on this board and tons more on other boards, eagles fans despartley wanted him to replace tapeh and become our big back. geez tony hunt is a better project at FB at 240lbs. but thats not the problem, we dont need a big back that everyone thinks. did you hear any analysts say our running game was the problem after the season westbrook had? no. it proves westbrook can carry the load...so stop with taking a RB/FB in the 2nd and 3rd/4th round when defense is the one needing the upgrade

Dillen
02-19-2007, 02:38 PM
Two things.

1) People who "desperately" want Leonard over Tapeh are idiots. I'd like to see where you came up with that.
2) Hunt being a better FB prospect than Leonard is another idiotic satement. Why, because he weighs more? ********.

cunningham06
02-19-2007, 02:43 PM
alright if anyone saw espns prep for the nfl draft on sportscenter and the description for the senior bowl from scott...brian leonard is trying to be a RB...he is 224 lbs...early on this board and tons more on other boards, eagles fans despartley wanted him to replace tapeh and become our big back. geez tony hunt is a better project at FB at 240lbs. but thats not the problem, we dont need a big back that everyone thinks. did you hear any analysts say our running game was the problem after the season westbrook had? no. it proves westbrook can carry the load...so stop with taking a RB/FB in the 2nd and 3rd/4th round when defense is the one needing the upgrade

Tapeh was good this season, and I certainly don't want him to be replaced. I would be furious if the Eagles picked a "big back" on day one. Like it has already been said, we could easily found a big powerful, situational RB in the last three rounds and be fine. It would be nice to have a big RB to move the pile, but I wouldn't put that above our other needs in the draft. As has been displayed in my previous posts, I'm a big Bruce Perry fan, and while he isn't a pile mover he's a powerful runner, so I think with a little progression on his part we would have our change of pace runner. What we need is a short yardage back/ goal line back. Someone who will get maybe 5 attempts a game.

GDawg239
02-19-2007, 03:00 PM
Please cut Mcdugle i mean seriously, he is a bust, i thought he would do good atleast once but never not even during the rotation thing since he is fresh,


he didnt do that good for playing in 14 games

ftbl88
02-19-2007, 03:32 PM
The main reason guys like me want Leonard is not for his running, it is his receiving as well. IF we lose Donte to FA, this pick would help our pass offense in a big way. Defenses wouldn't know what to do with both Westy and Leonard coming out of the backfield. Think of the matchup problems.

Dillen
02-19-2007, 03:43 PM
Wanting Leonard is fine, he'd be used very well. But for people who "desparately want him to replace Tapeh" when Tapeh just played in his first year as a FB and did a very good job, they don't know what they're talking about. If the Eagles drafted Leonard, I'd put money down that they would have him replace Buckhalter.

mpt117
02-19-2007, 04:11 PM
Two things.

1) People who "desperately" want Leonard over Tapeh are idiots. I'd like to see where you came up with that.
2) Hunt being a better FB prospect than Leonard is another idiotic satement. Why, because he weighs more? dumb.

just go over to the message boards on the eagles official website and youll see...and because leonard said he wants to play RB and is 6'1 224, hunt is 6'2 240...im just sayin to make an example and i guess a poor one at that

ftbl88
02-19-2007, 05:23 PM
I think in our system he could play both. He could be the backup RB to Westy and FB to Tapeh. He is very smart and would be willing to do both. In goal-line situations, bring in Nick Cole and have Leonard pound the rock into the end zone or on short yardage plays. On passing situations, have Leonard as the FB and keep Westy in at RB, because, even though Tapeh is a good blocker, he is a horrible receiver. Teams wouldn't know how to react if that happened. Something else that pops up, when Westy is in the slot or out wide, have Leonard as the RB. Just think if we still have Stallworth, teams would have to deal with him, Reggie Brown, Brian Westrook, L.J. Smith, and Leonard. I guarantee at least one of those guys would be open.Westy could be a diversion for Leonard or Leonard could be a diversion for Westy. There are many situations this offense could use a talent like Leonard. A guy like Leonard would take our offense from very good to very dominant. I wouldn't say I am desperate for him, but he would be worth our second round pick. I wouldn't trade up for him or anything like that though.

cunningham06
02-19-2007, 05:32 PM
What do you guys think of Napoleon Harris? He's probably going to end up a FA. I've talked to a few Vikings fans, and some of them believe that he is capable of playing SLB in a different system. He was never a good fit for the cover two, so he hopefully won't be too expensive. This is just a scenario for if we pass on drafting a LB high in the draft. We could bring in Napoleon, make sure that he fits our system, and if so let him compete with Dhani for strong side. He is just one of the FA's who would be good value IMO.

Dillen
02-19-2007, 05:54 PM
just go over to the message boards on the eagles official website and youll see...and because leonard said he wants to play RB and is 6'1 224, hunt is 6'2 240...im just sayin to make an example and i guess a poor one at that
I go onto the EMB all the time. I hardly see anyone want Leonard, but then again I don't go into TATE except for a few topics because the majority of them are idiots.

mpt117
02-19-2007, 06:10 PM
just go over to the message boards on the eagles official website and youll see...and because leonard said he wants to play RB and is 6'1 224, hunt is 6'2 240...im just sayin to make an example and i guess a poor one at that
I go onto the EMB all the time. I hardly see anyone want Leonard, but then again I don't go into TATE except for a few topics because the majority of them are idiots.

well i have to admit the leonard threads have died down over the past like 2 weeks but before that it was all about the guy

cunningham06
02-19-2007, 07:02 PM
Here are some quick mock drafts I did:

This is assuming that we don't resign Stallworth, but bring him back in FA.

1.
1st- Patrick Willis- SLB
2nd- Charles Johnson- DE also thought of Aaron Ross here to play S
3rd- Fred Bennett- CB
5th- Josh Gattis- S
6th- Yamon Figurs- WR
7th- Tim Castillo- FB, but would be a short yardage RB for us

2.
1st- Michael Griffin- SS
2nd- Buster Davis- SLB/ MLB of future
3rd- Tim Crowder- DE
5th- Nate Ilaoa- Big RB
6th- Duane Coleman- CB
7th- Quintin Echols- Big DT

I didn't pick any Offensive linemen because honestly we've got enough starters, backups, and projects right now. That and I don't really like the late round talent there and think we would be better served drafting other positions.

I hate the athleticism of the safeties in the 2nd round range(not including Meriweather but we won't pick him), so I didn't pick one there.

My 6th and 7th round picks I have no idea if they will be available there or not, I just like those players, and they fulfill a need.

jblaze66
02-19-2007, 07:42 PM
just go over to the message boards on the eagles official website and youll see...and because leonard said he wants to play RB and is 6'1 224, hunt is 6'2 240...im just sayin to make an example and i guess a poor one at that
I go onto the EMB all the time. I hardly see anyone want Leonard, but then again I don't go into TATE except for a few topics because the majority of them are idiots.

I agree those people over there are pretty ridiculous.

ftbl88
02-21-2007, 06:24 AM
I know Willis and Waters are popular on this thread, but what other MLBs would you want if both were unavailable? It doesn't matter what round it is in, as long as you think they would be a great player for this team.

GDawg239
02-21-2007, 08:02 AM
What do guys think about L.J Smith getting a new deal, i would not mind keeping him he is okay, if he did carry the ball a little closer to his body that would improve him by alot. Come next year, and we are in a good position to draft a boarder elite/great tight end do u guys think we would keep L.J

This year there are not really any good tight ends, beside Olsen from Miami that stand out

2 more days untill thursday when FA begins, and no word on stallworth, you guys think he will be Tagged at 7.65 million

bsaza2358
02-21-2007, 08:12 AM
I think LJ will receive a new deal either during training camp or during the season, depending on his production. He has been very good for the Eagles, and he has gotten better each year. I'm sure he could go and start for many other teams. He is fully incorporated into the scheme, and he is no longer a liability with blocking. There were other more pressing needs for extensions this season, but LJ will likely get a new deal.

bsaza2358
02-21-2007, 08:15 AM
Stallworth will not get tagged. He is not worth $7mm+ per season, and everyone in the league knows this. He will not sign an extension with the Eagles because that means the team will lose its third round pick as part of the trade with NO. Stallworth will test the market, and the Eagles will make their best offer. He will then make his decision, and we will live with it.

GDawg239
02-21-2007, 08:18 AM
yo i just noticed this Bsaza you need to change your sig. It should have cosdine in there instead of Lewis, or maybe someother SS when the season begins

bsaza2358
02-21-2007, 08:43 AM
yo i just noticed this Bsaza you need to change your sig. It should have cosdine in there instead of Lewis, or maybe someother SS when the season begins

I don't really have that capability right now. I didn't make the sig in the first place. I will change it when Michael Lewis is officially gone, and when next year's starting lineup is finalized. It is not high on my priority list right now...

Dillen
02-21-2007, 09:49 AM
I know Willis and Waters are popular on this thread, but what other MLBs would you want if both were unavailable? It doesn't matter what round it is in, as long as you think they would be a great player for this team.
Siler and Bishop. That's it for me.

DowntownReggieBrown
02-21-2007, 10:53 AM
The more I think about it, the more I think the Birds should probably trade down. If Willis isn't there at 26 there isn't a lot of great value at the end of Rd. 1 that couldn't be eclipsed by picking up an early-mid 2nd rounder and an early 3rd

Go_Eagles77
02-21-2007, 02:17 PM
I know Willis and Waters are popular on this thread, but what other MLBs would you want if both were unavailable? It doesn't matter what round it is in, as long as you think they would be a great player for this team.
Siler and Bishop. That's it for me.

Yeah I was gonna mention Bishop, he would be a great pickup early second day if we have yet to draft a MLB.

ftbl88
02-21-2007, 02:56 PM
There actually are rumvlings that Stallworth may be Franchised, but that would ruin the rest of our off-season. The only thing I see happening if he would be franchised is that we would trade him. Does anyone know what he would be worth in terms of draft picks, and would another team be willing to give up the pick(s). I don't think he would be worth more than a first rounder, but you never know.

Dillen
02-21-2007, 03:02 PM
Stallworth was traded for a 4th rounder and Mark Simoneau. People weren't exactly jumping out of their seats for a chance at a speed WR with a hamstring injury history. The Eagles wouldn't get anything much better. Let him walk or give him a long contract. Franchising him would be a huge mistake.

bsaza2358
02-21-2007, 03:12 PM
Absolutely agree. As I said before, Stallworth is not worth $7mm+ per season, so why give that to him? There is zero benefit to franchising him other than crippling the team. Make your best offer, let him make his visits, then go from there.

ftbl88
02-21-2007, 04:24 PM
It would be dumb to franchise him if we intended to keep him, I agree there, but if we franchise and trade, which I still wouldn't like, we would at least get a draft pick for him, with no hit to the salary cap. The point is, if we franchise and trade him, we would still have the same amount of cap room, but we would have more picks to help our team out. I still think he will be re-signed during FA, but this is another option that I have heard news about lately that I thought you all should know about.

ftbl88
02-21-2007, 04:30 PM
Another thing I found out. I was in the New Orleans thread and asked them about the Donte trade. Most of them agreed that if the Eagles re-sign Donte in FA, they would get next year's third rounder. I am not sure if the fourth rounder from this year is included, but I would assume not. They may have been feeding me bull, but it seemed like thats what they really thought. This is good news if it is true. We have a bunch of extra picks from trades lined up for next year. We have two fourth rounders and an extra 5th and seventh, I think. We would be able to work a trade to replace that third if this is the case. If we lose our 4th this year along with next year's third, that would not be fair to me, but we could work a way to get into the fourth this year with a trade of some sort.

bsaza2358
02-21-2007, 04:37 PM
As I recall it, Stallworth came for Simoneau and a conditional 4th rounder. The deal was that if the Eagles signed Stallworth to an extension, the Saints would get a third rounder instead of a 4th. I'm sure if there were other considerations, it would have been discussed. I recall this was a pretty huge trade at the time.

Dillen
02-21-2007, 05:34 PM
It would be dumb to franchise him if we intended to keep him, I agree there, but if we franchise and trade, which I still wouldn't like, we would at least get a draft pick for him, with no hit to the salary cap. The point is, if we franchise and trade him, we would still have the same amount of cap room, but we would have more picks to help our team out. I still think he will be re-signed during FA, but this is another option that I have heard news about lately that I thought you all should know about.
Yeah, until you franchise him and get a trade worked, but he doesn't agree to the contract extension with the other team so you don't get the Ravens 2005 3rd rounder and 2006 2nd rounder.



**** Corey Simon.

jonbrodo17
02-21-2007, 08:03 PM
sorry to change the topic but I haven't heard anything about michael bush, if i recall he was having a great college year and at 1 point was considered to be a heisman finalist then he got his season cut short but by the best possible way (if there is any, he broke his leg) and i thought he would be a great complementary back to westbrook, comments?

cunningham06
02-21-2007, 10:16 PM
sorry to change the topic but I haven't heard anything about michael bush, if i recall he was having a great college year and at 1 point was considered to be a heisman finalist then he got his season cut short but by the best possible way (if there is any, he broke his leg) and i thought he would be a great complementary back to westbrook, comments?

I really like Michael Bush. He is probably going to be taken in the second round after the combine I think. While I wouldn't like the pick of him in the second, worse picks could be made.

ftbl88
02-22-2007, 06:32 AM
As for the trade bsaza, I'm just telling what I heard. It may be right, it may be wrong, I'm thinking about starting a thread for everyone in the league to help figure this one out.

JackieDan
02-22-2007, 06:38 AM
If we do pick up Michael Bush with our second rounder it would be sending out the message that we are going to stay commited to the run.

I would however still prefer safety or linebacker at that point.

bsaza2358
02-22-2007, 09:22 AM
The Eagles don't have to spend a high round pick on a RB to make him successful. Buck, Tapeh, Moats, and BWest are both later round picks, and Mahe was a UDFA. The team is great at finding bargains later in the draft and focusing on more "important" positions. RB's can be had at any point.

Dillen
02-22-2007, 10:42 AM
If we do pick up Michael Bush with our second rounder it would be sending out the message that we are going to stay commited to the run.
Very true. I'd still rather have Dwayne Wright in the 3rd/4th.

bsaza2358
02-22-2007, 11:31 AM
If we do pick up Michael Bush with our second rounder it would be sending out the message that we are going to stay commited to the run.
Very true. I'd still rather have Dwayne Wright in the 3rd/4th.

Wright reminds me a lot of Buck when he came out, though he is more well known and had a stronger college workload...

Dillen
02-22-2007, 11:34 AM
Kolby Smith, UL's Mike Bush replacement, now he is a lot like Buck.

bsaza2358
02-22-2007, 11:59 AM
Kolby Smith, UL's Mike Bush replacement, now he is a lot like Buck.

Buck barely got a chance to shine at Nebraska during his time there. Wright is at least a known commodity. Smith will also be well known next season. Wright is flying under the radar, but he runs REALLY hard...

ftbl88
02-22-2007, 03:40 PM
bsaza, half of those guys are third round picks and one is a FB. Buck was a later round pick, thats it. As for Tapeh, in most years, the #1 FB isn't even chosen on the first day. The point is, most of their talent is early, but I would not use a pick on Michael Bush, he would not fit our system as well as Brian Leonard. Leonard is the only RB or FB that is worth a second round pick for the Eagles. Besides, Bush will be gone by the early second round anyway, and I might kill myself if we trade up for Bush.

ftbl88
02-22-2007, 03:42 PM
What are the chances that some Eagles would restructure contracts to free up cap space? Who would possibly be willing to do this and how much cap space could it possibly save?

bsaza2358
02-22-2007, 03:59 PM
bsaza, half of those guys are third round picks and one is a FB. Buck was a later round pick, thats it. As for Tapeh, in most years, the #1 FB isn't even chosen on the first day. The point is, most of their talent is early, but I would not use a pick on Michael Bush, he would not fit our system as well as Brian Leonard. Leonard is the only RB or FB that is worth a second round pick for the Eagles. Besides, Bush will be gone by the early second round anyway, and I might kill myself if we trade up for Bush.

I consider top picks first and second rounders, mid rounders for selections in the 3-5th rounds, and late picks in the 6-7th rounds. that is my personal classification system. Besides, both Westbrook and Moats were late third round picks. I'll give you Tapeh's FB status, but he was a FB/RB in college.

Leonard is an intriguing prospect, but he is similar to Lawrence Vickers, who the Eagles passed on last season because they liked Tapeh. I don't see the Eagles taking a RB on Day 1 this season. Just my opinion.

bsaza2358
02-22-2007, 04:05 PM
What are the chances that some Eagles would restructure contracts to free up cap space? Who would possibly be willing to do this and how much cap space could it possibly save?

I'm sure the team would love to restructure, but who is a target? Trotter and Kearse have big deals, but there won't be long-term savings because they won't be with the team longer than 2 more years each. Howard just signed a long deal, so restructuring might not matter. 4 real targets I have are Westbrook, McNabb, Lito, and Sheldon. Westbrook has 3 years left on his deal, and I'm sure something could be worked out there. Sheppard and Brown both have 4 years left and are definitely targets. I don't think the Eagles should mess with McNabb's contract with his injury status up in the air.

If it will help the team and such, Banner will make the contracts work out.

ftbl88
02-22-2007, 06:42 PM
I think it would be hard to restructure any deals that would free up major cap room. But if we could get Donovan to do so, that would go a long way to help out this franchise. I doubt it happens, same thing with Westbrook. He just signed a contract extension last year. I don't think he would be willing to restructure, especially after his first 1,000 yard rushing season, and all of the other stuff he did for this offense. I too, don't think Howard would restructure a deal. Another option could be Kearse. He is the most likely out of all of the guys you mentioned, because Lito and Brown are relatively young, and they still may want to make as much money as possible.

Dillen
02-22-2007, 06:44 PM
Trading Tra Thomas would free up $5M.


Just saying.

broadstbullies
02-22-2007, 08:41 PM
Trading Tra Thomas would free up $5M.


Just saying.

I don't want to mess with that line myself, not yet.. I doubt William Tra is back in 08 but Justice I don't trust

jonbrodo17
02-22-2007, 08:44 PM
i've always liked "william" (tra) and i doubt they would restructure deals but worth a shot

cunningham06
02-22-2007, 08:50 PM
Trading Tra Thomas would free up $5M.


Just saying.

I don't want to mess with that line myself, not yet.. I doubt William Tra is back in 08 but Justice I don't trust

As of right now we don't really know what we have with Justice because Reid didn't play him. What we need to do is start splitting time between the two this season. We need to get Justice ready to become a starter. I am wary about throwing him into the fire this early. If Reid would stop being so stubborn and play his damn rookies we might know what we have, but until we do I wouldn't get rid of Thomas.

mpt117
02-23-2007, 02:16 PM
last year the eagles drafted 6 out of the 8 players they had showed interest in (bunkley, justice, jean-gilles, avant, bloom, and ramsey.) 3 of the 8 were brought to philly for visits (bunkley, justice, and jean-gilles) also, 2 of the eagles UDFA were on the list as well, Hank Baskett (who we traded for) and OT Pat McCoy. so here are the various prospects the eagles showed interested in:

at the Shrine Game:
Idaho St. QB Matt Gutierrez
Michigan WR Steve Breaston
Texas DE Brian Robison

at the Senior Bowl (so far):
Texas OT/OG Justin Blalock
Arkansas OT Tony Ugoh
Georgia Tech OT/OG Mansfield Wrotto
Cal CB Daymeion Hughes
Fresno St. CB Marcus McCauley
Texas Tech OG Manuel Ramirez
Louisiana-Monroe SS Kevin Payne
Kansas St. RB Thomas Clayton
Clemson WR Chansi Stuckey
Notre Dame OT Ryan Harris

visited their school:
Albany OT Jacob Hobbs

Special Ties:
Notre Dame CB Mike Richardson (one of our asst. coaches Trent Walters coached him at ND)

these are all the players we have looked at so far...this was on the EMB last year and is on the EMB this year and on football refuge...why are we lookin at a majority of OL right now? if we draft an OL early on...

bsaza2358
02-23-2007, 02:36 PM
One reason could be that the Eagles always draft linemen. If they don't look at linemen among everyone else, their targets will be identified. One year doesn't really make a pattern. Ugoh is a pretty damn good player and could easily play RT for the Eagles after Runyan leaves/retires.

mpt117
02-23-2007, 02:54 PM
you have got to be kidding me on Ugoh right? hes been knocked on many draft sites, including this one, since his awful performance at the senior bowl...his stock has dropped. and im just saying im sick of them drafting OL even though i know its reid's philosophy. but we have bigger needs on defense now

bsaza2358
02-23-2007, 03:02 PM
This site isn't the be all, end all of analysis. Senior Bowl is important, but not everything. I never said he would be a first round pick, and I'm not saying he should be. I'm just stating the obvious: the Eagles always draft OLinemen. They have aging OT's. The NFL expects the team to throw a lot of smoke out there, and they stay very tight lipped about who they're looking at. If the team didn't look at OLinemen, the rest of the GM's would think something's up. Follow?

mpt117
02-23-2007, 03:08 PM
im not dumb, i just pretty much agreed in my last post. ok? that is why we drafted justice and we also have pat mccoy and stefan rogers. plus herremans is more of a tackle than a guard

bsaza2358
02-23-2007, 03:10 PM
im not dumb, i just pretty much agreed in my last post. ok? that is why we drafted justice and we also have pat mccoy and stefan rogers. plus herremans is more of a tackle than a guard

I'm not saying you're dumb. My point was that the team generally throws out a lot of smoke to prevent their real intentions from being discovered. Remember the "shocker" Shawn Andrews pick? Same kind of thing. They'll have a nice board out there and will take the BPA that fits a need. I'm not worried about them taking a bunch of Olinemen in this draft.

mpt117
02-23-2007, 03:11 PM
all i want for them to do is LB or Safety in the first 2 rounds then idc...i want Willis def in round 1

bsaza2358
02-23-2007, 03:16 PM
all i want for them to do is LB or Safety in the first 2 rounds then idc...i want Willis def in round 1

If they did this, I would be happy as well. No argument here.

ftbl88
02-23-2007, 04:43 PM
I think we should definitely go LB and safety in the first two or three rounds. I am beginning to come around that Willis may be left for our pick, but if not, we could get Waters in the third, with Griffin in the first and a DE in the second. I really think Leonard would be a good fit for our second pick in a stiuation where ther are no DEs or LBs worthy of a second round pick if we get Griffin. I know it won't convince you guys, but I would love to have him on our team.

bsaza2358
02-23-2007, 04:49 PM
I think we should definitely go LB and safety in the first two or three rounds. I am beginning to come around that Willis may be left for our pick, but if not, we could get Waters in the third, with Griffin in the first and a DE in the second. I really think Leonard would be a good fit for our second pick in a stiuation where ther are no DEs or LBs worthy of a second round pick if we get Griffin. I know it won't convince you guys, but I would love to have him on our team.

Looking at the Eagles draft history under Reid, there is no way Leonard is our second round pick. Not Leonard, not any RB/FB. I can see someone later on in the draft, but not that early. The team has holes to fill at LB, S, DE, and potentially DT. They could also use a developmental QB prospect super late, another WR if Stallworth is gone, and BPA from there. If Leonard falls, the Eagles could snag him, but I'm not sure if he fits a need with Tapeh doing well and Westbrook being the man...

ftbl88
02-23-2007, 04:57 PM
This might convince some of you on the Leonard pick, but if not, I can't say I didn't try.
Keep in mind this is IF Leonard would be picked by us.
Round 1:
Willis, Griffin, Carriker, or another DE
Round 2:
Weddle, Wendling, Leonard, or DE. ( I don't see any LBs that I like in the second that would be around for our pick. If you think there would be tell me.)
Round 3:
Leonard, Waters, DE, S.
Trade for a fourth, hopefully using any combination that includes the bowtie.
Round 4:
Waters, DE, CB, Run-stuffing DT (If we don't get one in FA), TE (maybe)
Round 5:
CB, DT, TE, OL
Round 6:
CB, DT, TE, QB to groom (maybe), OL
Round 7:
CB, DT, TE, QB, OL
This is a very likely draft considering the depth at the posititions of our need. I would be very happy with a draft like this and I hope the rest of you would be too. Enjoy, or hate, whichever you prefer.

ftbl88
02-23-2007, 04:59 PM
You know, its funny you wrote that, because I was doing the thing above as you wrote this. The only thing I disagree on is WR, even if we lose Stallworth.

bsaza2358
02-23-2007, 05:00 PM
All of these scenarios are viable, I just don't see the front office making those moves. That is my personal opinion here.

cunningham06
02-23-2007, 05:06 PM
This might convince some of you on the Leonard pick, but if not, I can't say I didn't try.
Keep in mind this is IF Leonard would be picked by us.
Round 1:
Willis, Griffin, Carriker, or another DE
Round 2:
Weddle, Wendling, Leonard, or DE. ( I don't see any LBs that I like in the second that would be around for our pick. If you think there would be tell me.)
Round 3:
Leonard, Waters, DE, S.
Trade for a fourth, hopefully using any combination that includes the bowtie.
Round 4:
Waters, DE, CB, Run-stuffing DT (If we don't get one in FA), TE (maybe)
Round 5:
CB, DT, TE, OL
Round 6:
CB, DT, TE, QB to groom (maybe), OL
Round 7:
CB, DT, TE, QB, OL
This is a very likely draft considering the depth at the posititions of our need. I would be very happy with a draft like this and I hope the rest of you would be too. Enjoy, or hate, whichever you prefer.

I don't see us dealing Dhani Jones away, he's our insurance policy because if we don't draft a LB Gocong is a big gamble. One player who I can definitely see being dealt, Darwin Walker. He is not a good starter for us, and we need to get Bunkley starting on the field. If Bunkley doesn't start for us this season I am going to bust a nut.

jonbrodo17
02-23-2007, 05:45 PM
i will be pretty upset too, and i would just love to have patrick willis because of his ability and he is a great guy for the team and could develop to be a key figure in the "veterans commitee" i just hope willis falls

ftbl88
02-23-2007, 06:33 PM
It is looking likely that Willis will fall, and Walker would be a good trade too. But I think we may get a cheap FA OLB like Rob Morris for the insurance if Gocng doesn't work out. My point in doing the whole thing though was, would you be willing to get Leonard if a situation like this would happen?

GDawg239
02-23-2007, 08:51 PM
I think if we go DE or LB in the first and someone like Weddel is there who has and can play safety and Cb he would be a good option to take there

If Willis is gone what about Timmons is he any good for us or Beason

GDawg239
02-23-2007, 09:13 PM
forget weddel cant really play run

how about the de from hawii he is massive and is quick for a big fellow

bsaza2358
02-23-2007, 11:59 PM
baha, if you're gonna talk about a "dude from Hawaii" or a specific player, please post links to Scott's scouting report and such. Thanks.

ftbl88
02-24-2007, 02:16 PM
What would the Eagles do if all the top DEs, Safeties, and LBs were gone by their pick? I know a lot of you are going to say trade down, but it is so hard to do something like that. Who would we pick if we were forced into a situation where something like this happened and we couldn't trade down?

Dillen
02-24-2007, 02:25 PM
Robert Meachem, Daymeion Hughes, LaMarr Woodley, or Aaron Ross. Either of those corners assuming Revis is gone. If not, definitely him. He'd be perfect.

ftbl88
02-25-2007, 09:09 AM
Anybody else want to give it a try?

jonbrodo17
02-25-2007, 12:21 PM
maybe we would pick Leonard prob. not but if all of them were gone...

Dillen
02-25-2007, 12:28 PM
Brian Leonard in the 1st round would be an abysmal pick at best.

ftbl88
02-25-2007, 06:11 PM
I agree about the Leonard pick, but it would be a really good second round pick assuming we would fill a need in the first. We might go WR or TE, but I don't think either are.

B-Dawk
02-25-2007, 06:44 PM
well Feeley got a 3 year extension, so it is probably all but guaranteed that Garcia will not re-sign.

http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/PHI/10021530

cunningham06
02-25-2007, 10:53 PM
I really like Leonard, he's a very good player. I went to the Texas bowl game between Rutgers and Kansas State, and Leonard is really a load when he's got the ball. I don't think the Eagles will take him in the second simply because it's not really that great of a need for us there, but I really hope wherever he goes he plays FB and not RB, because the FB position has declined greatly in terms of rushing and receiving from what it used to be. That being said we need to increase Tapeh's carries and receptions, that will minimalize our need for another RB.

jonbrodo17
02-26-2007, 07:32 AM
i am pretty upset Garcia is gone especially the way the eagles handled it, he really wanted to be back

ds8582
02-26-2007, 08:46 AM
i am pretty upset Garcia is gone especially the way the eagles handled it, he really wanted to be back

It is kinda crappy the way they handled it.

bsaza2358
02-26-2007, 09:04 AM
It is kinda crappy the way they handled it.

I really don't care how people think the team handled the Garcia thing. They could have been more political about it, but it was a business move. Whatever got out into the public came from Garcia's camp. We'll never know what he demanded from the team or what the Eagles may have been willing to give him. Garcia wasn't going to get a contract from the Eagles. They weren't planning on giving him a raise or a longer term contract because he's 37 years old.

eaglesalltheway
02-26-2007, 02:46 PM
Its a good move to save McNabb some sleep.

bsaza2358
02-26-2007, 03:36 PM
I think McNabb's job security was a secondary consideration here. Garcia is older, may have already peaked, and there's no guarantee that he's a better longer term value for the Eagles than Feeley. I think you let youth be served.

The Philly talk radio was complaining that the fans "never get what they want". I think it's because you have to look realistically at situations, then act accordingly.

brat316
02-26-2007, 06:42 PM
you guys think Stallworth is going to come back to the eagle after test FA, yeah he will be offred a lot of money, but would he really want to be part of a building process

mpt117
02-27-2007, 05:46 PM
alright im glad we got feeley and mikell back...seems like we got thomas back too. so who does everyone else want back? stallworth is obvious. i want hood or james to return. and i wouldnt mind barber or buckhalter but those are longshots...anyone else that you guys want to return

eaglesalltheway
02-27-2007, 06:01 PM
Stallworth won't be back, sadly, but I would like James back as well, because Hood is as good as gone. Also, bring back Koy to be our holder.

cunningham06
02-27-2007, 08:32 PM
Hood's gone, at this point William James would be good, but we don't really need him all that much, we can address CB in the draft.

brat316
02-27-2007, 11:33 PM
Yeah if we dont find a decent replacement in the draft at CB, we will bring back james right after the draft, i dont see many people going after him like hood

Buck is decent but i dont want to see him back, somone else could be found in the mid rounds like usual like tony hunt, or late like Nate Illiaia

Barber i didnt see him make that big of an impact, and he did get injured, i dont think he is going to come back

Koy will be brought back as someone here said before if your holder makes you kicker better hes a keeper

unless Chang some how beats Koy and makes it on the roster

jonbrodo17
02-28-2007, 06:42 AM
i dont think any body mentioned juqua thomas i would love to have him back.... do u guys think that the signing of Mikell will mean that they will go LB in th edraft?

bsaza2358
02-28-2007, 08:45 AM
jon, we already mentioned in another thread that Juqua Thomas has likely agreed to an extension and will likely be back next season.

eaglesalltheway
02-28-2007, 02:11 PM
Yeah he's back, but its not and extension, he was re-signed. The difference is it costs us money against our cap if he is re-signed, which hurts a little bit. But if we get him back it is worth the salary hit, as long as it isn't outrageous.

brat316
02-28-2007, 08:28 PM
Too many threads to be keeping track of wats happening why people why cant we just stick to the main one

eaglesalltheway
03-01-2007, 03:42 PM
I actually like it more this way. It makes it lesslikely that we forget about a topic or skip somone's question. It is more organized and if you want to check up on one topic, its title is right there, so you can find it more easily. Plus, there is less going back and forth between topics, so you can keep everyone's thoughts about that topic.

bsaza2358
03-01-2007, 04:20 PM
I agree. This new setup is vastly superior in many ways.

cunningham06
03-01-2007, 08:03 PM
Agreed, I love having a forum for the Eagles.

Auron
03-05-2007, 01:44 PM
I have a quick question for Eagles fans..

can I get some opinions on Rod Hood, and William James? both are visiting us and played some CB for you guys last year.

Do either of them have any future at CB, who would be a better signing?

bsaza2358
03-05-2007, 01:56 PM
Hood is a much better player at this point. He is a starting caliber CB. Not excellent at anything specific, but no weak points. Plays well in press coverage, tackles well enough. Hard worker.

James (formerly Allen), was a former top pick of the Giants. He had some good seasons, but he also has an injury history. He didn't play a lot for us last year, and he didn't get a ton of PT. He has good cover skills, though. Ideally, I'd like the Eagles to keep both, but they are constrained.

eaglesalltheway
03-05-2007, 02:08 PM
I would go Hood over James. Hood is a better cover corner and has less injury concerns.

brat316
03-05-2007, 03:38 PM
no one is looking at stallworth right now no news about him mean good news for us

also i heard that the eagles are looking at Corey Dillion and Tully Banta-Cain now i dont think Dillon would want to play here since he is looking at spliting time, though he may get more chances to get the ball or may not

Banta Cain is a decent LB a ST guy

eaglesalltheway
03-05-2007, 04:05 PM
Read the thing in the Donte Stalworth re-signing, that is why he may not be getting much attention. To save most of you some time, I'll just tell you that there is a rumor (I hope its a rumor and not true) that Donte is in the League's substance abuse problem. Please just check it out.

brat316
03-07-2007, 12:30 AM
SO guys what do we use this forum for now it looks like a dead waste land

DragonMekha
03-07-2007, 02:06 AM
Perhaps its slightly dead because the Eagles arent doing much of anything right now.Alot of the guys people mentioned are all signed somewhere else and about the only thing to talk about is what the hell is going on with Donte Stallworth.What I wonder is why we arent looking at any safeties or maybe just even bring one in to visit.Someone like Ken Hamlin or Deon Grant.

eaglesalltheway
03-07-2007, 09:04 AM
It would be nice to at least show some interest in at least one safety. But if the Eagles don't, it pretty much assures we will pick one very early in the draft.

bsaza2358
03-07-2007, 10:29 AM
The Eagles are not going to overpay for anything. They value the players that will fit their team, then they will offer what they think is fair market value. If the player takes it, fantastic. If not, oh well.

I am very encouraged that Hamlin has not really been in the news. Some of the big FA money has already been spent.

eaglesalltheway
03-07-2007, 06:13 PM
I heard somewhere that he has been interviewed by New Orleans, Arizona, and someone else, I don't remember. I also hear that there was concern over an injury to his skull that had teams a little worried, but I had never heard of that until then. Does anyone know if that is true? I would love to bring in this years top FA safety, but I just don't see it happening. The only way we have a chance at him is if we don't get Donte. Then the question becomes, would you rather have Donte or Hamlin. Personally, I would rather have Donte, even if he is a little more expensive, because there will most likely be a good safety that the Eagles can draft in the first or second round. And I am almost 100% sure we will not go offense with our first pick, unless, by some ungodly reason Calvin Johnson is available, but I would never hold my breath waiting for that one to happen, which it won't. But I'm not a member of the FO, so they could see it completely differently than I do.

cunningham06
03-07-2007, 08:30 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if he does have a skull injury, after all he was assaulted with a pole the season before last... I agree that Stallworth would be the better signing, drafting defensive players is easier than drafting WR's and the value of WR's at our position in the draft is not that great.

Bigp5437
03-07-2007, 08:47 PM
Well the concern was over the fight he got in at the end of that season(the one before this season), one of the injuries he suffered was a fractured skull, in addition to a small blood clot and brusing of his brain tissue, so of course that arose great concern because of the type of punishment he would be absorbing if he were able to come back. But he was able to play all 16 games this past season if I'm not mistaken, and really didn't show any ill aftereffects. But even still additional concern is definitely understandable, he may not have had any problem this past season but down the line they want to be sure, players play through a lot of pain sometimes and don't want to speak up because it could cost them millions when they believe they can withstand it.

eaglesalltheway
03-08-2007, 06:17 AM
But that brings up another concern, why did he get in that fight that caused him to get hit with the pole. Maybe character concerns are an issue, but I haven't heard anything like that about him.

Bigp5437
03-08-2007, 10:43 AM
Oh no, as far as I know he's not one for character concerns, he was well liked by his teammates and everyone before and after that, and hadn't been in any trouble that I can remember. It was one of those misunderstandings that went completely out of control. He was leaving a nightclub with his girlfriend, and he put his hand on a guy's shoulder to say excuse me to get by. The guy overreacted and said stop pushing, and things escalated from there to him punching the guy, at which point he got jumped basically. And it just went totally out of control when he was hit with the street sign over the head.

But I think most of us have been in a situation where things are misunderstood, and almost escalates to the point of a fight. We're all human, no one is ever going to go through their life without getting in some type of conflict. But also why I don't see any further character concerns with him is because of this. If a fight like this almost cost you your life, let alone your career, I think you would smarten up and make sure you don't place yourself in a situation like that again(at least MOST people with good enough common sense)

eaglesalltheway
03-08-2007, 02:40 PM
I hadn't heard any concerns about his character, so I assumed they weren't that big of a deal. Sounds like one of those things where you just wish people would calm down and listen. Sounds like a tough situation, I'm sure getting bashed on the head with a street sign doesn't exactly feel all that good.

brat316
03-08-2007, 05:21 PM
How about the eagles signing bethal Johnson

brat316
03-08-2007, 05:33 PM
any one else think we should go back to the three back system, Westbrook, some big back and then Moats or Taphe

eaglesalltheway
03-08-2007, 05:58 PM
I don't think a three back system would be successful with Tapeh and Moats. Tapeh gets basically zero rushes, I think it is because AR is afraid of him fumbling, as well as Moats, but I like what Moats did for us in '05. We need a two-back system with Westy as the feature back and a bigger, hard-nosed RB as a compliment to him.

cunningham06
03-08-2007, 08:01 PM
But that brings up another concern, why did he get in that fight that caused him to get hit with the pole. Maybe character concerns are an issue, but I haven't heard anything like that about him.

Hamlin got jumped. It wasn't because he was doing something he shouldn't have been. He may have insulted or baited the guy who did it but he certainly wasn't responsible in any way for what happened to him. Damn ***** with a pole, things would have been different had there been no pole just hand to hand combat.

eaglesalltheway
03-08-2007, 08:27 PM
Hamlin got jumped. It wasn't because he was doing something he shouldn't have been. He may have insulted or baited the guy who did it but he certainly wasn't responsible in any way for what happened to him. Damn ***** with a pole, things would have been different had there been no pole just hand to hand combat.

I had been told already, but thanks anyway.

brat316
03-11-2007, 05:47 PM
We gave Fowler an offer, so if he takes it and its not matched by dalllas what is the compenstion a 6th

brat316
03-11-2007, 05:58 PM
He is pretty smart he got a 32 on wonderlic also he can jump 37in if that makes any diffrence
Willis has a better 40 and he jumped an inch higher

only thing is that the change of direction drills like 20 yard dash or Pro Agility Fowler is better, and 3 cone drill
Personlly i think the changing direction drills are more important,

but any ways what do u guys think

cunningham06
03-11-2007, 06:27 PM
Why are you comparing Fowler and Willis? Fowler is trash and probably won't make the team. Willis is a phenomenal athlete, has great intangibles, and had excellent production in college. None of these can be said of Fowler.

eaglesalltheway
03-11-2007, 07:28 PM
Why are you comparing Fowler and Willis? Fowler is trash and probably won't make the team. Willis is a phenomenal athlete, has great intangibles, and had excellent production in college. None of these can be said of Fowler.

I share your opinion, I wouldn't want Fowler even if we didn't give up a pick. Willis is by far better and would be a much better choice for the Eagles to make than Fowler. Hopefully, Dallas wants to keep him, because I don't want him.

brat316
03-14-2007, 02:47 PM
Any chance the eagles might be intrested in Stokley if they dont get Curtis

bsaza2358
03-14-2007, 04:52 PM
There is no point in going after Brandon Stokley. He is pretty old, has been injured for the past 2 seasons, and he was only effective as a #3 option in a non-WCO system a few years back. I'd rather have UDFA's than pay a veteran minimum contract to Stokley.

eaglesalltheway
03-15-2007, 06:33 AM
Stokley is a slot receiver at best. He is injured way too much and is losing his game. I don't want him at all.

bsaza2358
03-15-2007, 09:04 AM
As a long time veteran, he also commands a decently high salary, even if we pay the minimum. I don't think the bang/buck is there for Stokely.

brat316
03-15-2007, 01:30 PM
what do u guys think of the first Pick of the new mock, Mechem i like him he does have speed and great hands, but i rather have Griffen

Also the second round pick not a big fan of that pick i think we could pick up a better DE or MLB there

bsaza2358
03-15-2007, 02:31 PM
I'm not sure exactly what Scott is doing with the Eagles. I'm very certain that he overrates the team's need for a WR and underrates the need for defensive skill players. His priorities do not jive with the actual needs of the team.

brat316
03-15-2007, 03:22 PM
Jive thats a cool word u jive turkey

jonbrodo17
03-15-2007, 03:25 PM
we just signed Curtis (philadelphiaeagles.com) so were not taking Meachem. I just want the best player available, offense or defense. But i would really want Willis but I know he's gonna be long gone now

brat316
03-15-2007, 03:32 PM
YES we got Curtis that is amazing, how about Javis Moss at our pick, not a fan of him, would rather have griffen but what do u guys think of that pic

eaglesalltheway
03-15-2007, 03:40 PM
YES we got Curtis that is amazing, how about Javis Moss at our pick, not a fan of him, would rather have griffen but what do u guys think of that pic

I would rather have Griffin, but Moss would be an acceptable pick if he was gone.

cunningham06
03-16-2007, 12:08 AM
YES we got Curtis that is amazing, how about Javis Moss at our pick, not a fan of him, would rather have griffen but what do u guys think of that pic

I honestly think Moss is going to bust if he stays at DE. He is horrible vs. the run so I don't want him at all. He's an intriguing 3-4 OLB prospect though, but he would be a bad fit for us. Right now I'm thinking Griffin would be the best pick for us, although I do love Patrick Willis, it's easier to get a playmaking LB in the second round than a playmaking safety.

eaglesalltheway
03-16-2007, 06:22 AM
I honestly think Moss is going to bust if he stays at DE. He is horrible vs. the run so I don't want him at all. He's an intriguing 3-4 OLB prospect though, but he would be a bad fit for us. Right now I'm thinking Griffin would be the best pick for us, although I do love Patrick Willis, it's easier to get a playmaking LB in the second round than a playmaking safety.

I have to agree with you on the Griffin and Willis thing, but Moss would be a good pick if all of our top players wee gone and we couldn't trade down.

bsaza2358
03-16-2007, 08:30 AM
I think if the top players on our board are gone, the Eagles immediately start shopping their pick to move back into the early second round.

bsaza2358
03-16-2007, 08:31 AM
The best part about the Curtis signing is that Scott can now stop giving the Eagles WR's in the first 3 rounds of the draft. At that point, we can start hammering him on the lunacy of taking a first day QB to sit on the bench behind McNabb and Feeley...

eaglesalltheway
03-16-2007, 05:08 PM
Now instead of yelling at people to stop giving us WRs, we will have to yell at them to stop giving us QBs.

Eaglez.Fan
03-17-2007, 09:45 AM
No way Jarvis Moss at DE. He'd be terrible, the only reason why he is in the 1st round is because he will play the 3-4 OLB and he's athletic. But now with Curtis the pick, it's 100% defense, either LB or SS for me.

eaglesalltheway
03-17-2007, 02:02 PM
No way Jarvis Moss at DE. He'd be terrible, the only reason why he is in the 1st round is because he will play the 3-4 OLB and he's athletic. But now with Curtis the pick, it's 100% defense, either LB or SS for me.

LB or SS is good as well, but DE is still a need. We could end up picking a DE in round one if all of the safeties and LBs are gone.

neko4
03-18-2007, 03:50 AM
Hey eagles fans new "fantasy offseason-type" game starting up
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4174

Eaglez.Fan
03-18-2007, 10:51 AM
LB or SS is good as well, but DE is still a need. We could end up picking a DE in round one if all of the safeties and LBs are gone.

I say we take one in round 4-6

We have Howard/Kearse will start bearing Kearse's health. Then Juqua Thomas who IMO can play alot of snaps, I like him alot. Then backing up Kearse is Trent Cole who we know can play. All we need is a little more depth behind Cole, possibly a bigger guy. Since Cole and Kearse are the fast/quick type. We need to take LB on day one no doubt, I want an ILB, possibly Waters from Clemson. I also say we give Gocong a chance to start instead of Dhani. As for SS it also has to be adressed on day 1

cunningham06
03-18-2007, 11:29 AM
LB or SS is good as well, but DE is still a need. We could end up picking a DE in round one if all of the safeties and LBs are gone.

Well, if we were to take a DE in round 1 I would much rather take Tim Crowder over Moss. Moss is a liability against the run, and we don't need another situational pass-rusher.

Green Kool Aid
03-18-2007, 07:04 PM
I say we take one in round 4-6

We have Howard/Kearse will start bearing Kearse's health. Then Juqua Thomas who IMO can play alot of snaps, I like him alot. Then backing up Kearse is Trent Cole who we know can play. All we need is a little more depth behind Cole, possibly a bigger guy. Since Cole and Kearse are the fast/quick type. We need to take LB on day one no doubt, I want an ILB, possibly Waters from Clemson. I also say we give Gocong a chance to start instead of Dhani. As for SS it also has to be adressed on day 1

I really think the team should end the Gocong experiment and move him back to his natural end position, where he can rush the passer. They then have to find a SLB (Lance Briggs anyone?). But the move would replenish DE depth, and eliminate a need for the draft.

I also wouldn't blow off a Meacham or Bowe pick in round one, even after the Curtis signing. Those guys might be better than anyone else available, including Michael Griffin. You definitely have to think twice.

My reasonably realistic picks in round one:

Patrick Willis
Michael Griffin
Paul Poszlusny

cunningham06
03-18-2007, 11:36 PM
I really think the team should end the Gocong experiment and move him back to his natural end position, where he can rush the passer. They then have to find a SLB (Lance Briggs anyone?). But the move would replenish DE depth, and eliminate a need for the draft.

I also wouldn't blow off a Meacham or Bowe pick in round one, even after the Curtis signing. Those guys might be better than anyone else available, including Michael Griffin. You definitely have to think twice.

My reasonably realistic picks in round one:

Patrick Willis
Michael Griffin
Paul Poszlusny

There is no way we get Briggs. Sure he's not happy in Chicago, but Chicago is probably not just going to release him. He's franchised and the price to get him from Chicago would be high. We would lose key draft picks and it just wouldn't be worth it.

eaglesalltheway
03-19-2007, 06:11 AM
I say we take one in round 4-6

We have Howard/Kearse will start bearing Kearse's health. Then Juqua Thomas who IMO can play alot of snaps, I like him alot. Then backing up Kearse is Trent Cole who we know can play. All we need is a little more depth behind Cole, possibly a bigger guy. Since Cole and Kearse are the fast/quick type. We need to take LB on day one no doubt, I want an ILB, possibly Waters from Clemson. I also say we give Gocong a chance to start instead of Dhani. As for SS it also has to be adressed on day 1

We will probably take a DE in round 4-6 if the draft wroks out the way it should, but we may take one earlier if we need to, depending on the situation. I agree with pretty much everything you said there.

eaglesalltheway
03-19-2007, 06:16 AM
I really think the team should end the Gocong experiment and move him back to his natural end position, where he can rush the passer. They then have to find a SLB (Lance Briggs anyone?). But the move would replenish DE depth, and eliminate a need for the draft.

I also wouldn't blow off a Meacham or Bowe pick in round one, even after the Curtis signing. Those guys might be better than anyone else available, including Michael Griffin. You definitely have to think twice.

My reasonably realistic picks in round one:

Patrick Willis
Michael Griffin
Paul Poszlusny

Absolutely no way we get Briggs, or draft a WR. Those picks make sense, and after those I would go Timmons, then Beason. I'm sure there are players higher on their board, but we have no realistic shot at those, unless we trade up.

Green Kool Aid
03-19-2007, 08:24 AM
Absolutely no way we get Briggs, or draft a WR. Those picks make sense, and after those I would go Timmons, then Beason. I'm sure there are players higher on their board, but we have no realistic shot at those, unless we trade up.

I'm speaking from a talent level point of view. I would take Bowe or Meacham over Beason or Timmons. We already have a small LB corp; we don't really neeed more little guys. Timmons is promising, but like Bunkley, he's another Florida State guy who only performed at a high level for a year, and that's gotta make you stop and think. The same could be said for Meacham, but he's got great physical skills. Besides, it's not like the Eagles WRs are setting the world on fire. Who would you rather have the last WR spot go to: Meacham or Bowe or Greg Lewis?

If the Eagles take an LBs besides Poz, Willis, Stewart Bradley, or any other SLB, then that means Trott goes and Gaither plays the middle, and the new guy is the WLB most likely. If you draft Beason, then you basically have two MLBs, and someone is going to have to move to WLB permanently.

bsaza2358
03-19-2007, 09:12 AM
Now instead of yelling at people to stop giving us WRs, we will have to yell at them to stop giving us QBs.

Very true. I'm sooooo sick of that. At least Scott doesn't have the Eagles taking Troy Smith in Round 2 again. That made me incredibly angry.

eaglesalltheway
03-19-2007, 03:06 PM
I'm speaking from a talent level point of view. I would take Bowe or Meacham over Beason or Timmons. We already have a small LB corp; we don't really neeed more little guys. Timmons is promising, but like Bunkley, he's another Florida State guy who only performed at a high level for a year, and that's gotta make you stop and think. The same could be said for Meacham, but he's got great physical skills. Besides, it's not like the Eagles WRs are setting the world on fire. Who would you rather have the last WR spot go to: Meacham or Bowe or Greg Lewis?

If the Eagles take an LBs besides Poz, Willis, Stewart Bradley, or any other SLB, then that means Trott goes and Gaither plays the middle, and the new guy is the WLB most likely. If you draft Beason, then you basically have two MLBs, and someone is going to have to move to WLB permanently.

From a talent point of veiw, I would still go with any of the LBs. Though Meachem does seem very good, he did just have one year of production. Most of the LBs in this draft are small, but Veason is only 2 or 4 lbs. lighter than Poz. Besides, I don't think we need to draft a SAM, we got that in Gocong. We either need a WILL for when Gaither moves to MIKE, or a MIKE if Gaither is going to stay at WILL, which is where I think he will end up staying. I don't understand your whole WR thing. If we would draft a WR, he would start out as our third string, unless one of them would really surpise. But with the money we invested in Curtis, I don't think we will be drafting a WR at all this year. We are set at that position for a long time IMO. All we need is a good LB this year and we could be set at the LB corp for a long time, if Gocong works out the way we all hope.

Green Kool Aid
03-19-2007, 04:10 PM
From a talent point of veiw, I would still go with any of the LBs. Though Meachem does seem very good, he did just have one year of production. Most of the LBs in this draft are small, but Veason is only 2 or 4 lbs. lighter than Poz. Besides, I don't think we need to draft a SAM, we got that in Gocong. We either need a WILL for when Gaither moves to MIKE, or a MIKE if Gaither is going to stay at WILL, which is where I think he will end up staying. I don't understand your whole WR thing. If we would draft a WR, he would start out as our third string, unless one of them would really surpise. But with the money we invested in Curtis, I don't think we will be drafting a WR at all this year. We are set at that position for a long time IMO. All we need is a good LB this year and we could be set at the LB corp for a long time, if Gocong works out the way we all hope.

That's a big "if". Reports from last year's camp were that Gocong looked lost at SLB, and that the injury was an excuse to bench him for a year because he wasn't ready.

I've been saying for a while that Gocong should be move back to DE for depth. Beason is strictly a MLB, so what happens to Trott? Cut him? Timmons could be a WLB, but then what happens to Gaither? Cut Trott? You still need a SLB, unless you believe in the Gocong experiment, and you have to remember, Gocong was coveted by 3-4 D teams, and it was a surprise pick for the Eagles. But you can trust the Eagles, the team who told you that Barry Gardener, Levon Kirkland, and Blaine Bishop would make up for replacing Trott the last time.

I also explained a WR pick in the first. I'm not saying it's my preference, but this is a pretty good class of WRs. I think Bowe and Meachamm are pretty good prospects. Notice I didn't say Dwayne Jarrett because I don't think he's better than Beason or Timmons. I'm speaking purelyfrom a talent level, and because our WRs are just average. People are excited over the Curtis signing, but overlook the fact that he was the third reciever behind two future hall of famers. Besides the fact that he and Stallworth are getting the same money, which makes the move questionable, but also Curtis is going to face increased coverage from CBs, instead of being mismatched against LBs.

It really all depends on the way things shake out in the draft.

Green Kool Aid
03-19-2007, 04:21 PM
BTW, like I said, if you're gonna put down Meacham for one year of production, then you gotta question last year's Bunkley pick, and Timmons this year because both guys are coming out of the same program and have only one good year of production.

And Poz is taller than Beason, has the frame to get bigger (as Scott says), and can play all three LB positions, and specializes on both outside positions, where we have depth issues. All the same reasons go for Willis, who I would pick over Poz, except Willis would be our future MLB. Timmons is strictly a WLB, so if you drafted him, you would have to either move Gaither and/or cut Trotter.

Like I said (IMO):
Willis
Griffin
Poz

Other possibilites the Eagles may be looking at:
Charles Johnson
Anthony Spencer
Greg Olson
Eric Weddle

eaglesalltheway
03-19-2007, 04:46 PM
BTW, like I said, if you're gonna put down Meacham for one year of production, then you gotta question last year's Bunkley pick, and Timmons this year because both guys are coming out of the same program and have only one good year of production.

And Poz is taller than Beason, has the frame to get bigger (as Scott says), and can play all three LB positions, and specializes on both outside positions, where we have depth issues. All the same reasons go for Willis, who I would pick over Poz, except Willis would be our future MLB. Timmons is strictly a WLB, so if you drafted him, you would have to either move Gaither and/or cut Trotter.

Like I said (IMO):
Willis
Griffin
Poz

Other possibilites the Eagles may be looking at:
Charles Johnson
Anthony Spencer
Greg Olson
Eric Weddle

I agree with most of those picksexcept Weddle, he is not a first round talent. He would be great in the second though. Just because you think Timmons is strictly a WILL, doesn't mean we would automatically have to cut Trooter to move Gaither to his spot. Gaither could be the backup MLB behind Trotter if Timmons is really all that good. Poz is taller, but by two inches, and Poz is heavier, but by less than 5 lbs. All of these lbs are very close in height and weight. Poz would not be able to play SAM in our defense, he would be a WILL. He does have the frame to get bigger, but maybe only 5 lbs, 10 at the most. Most of the LBs in this year's draft could get bigger, but we already have Gocong who doesn't need to get bigger. I don't know where you heard he was lost at training camp, because I heard he was adapting to the position change as expected. He is a very smart guy from Cal-Poly, so I don't think he would be lost trying to figure out a defense, even though JJ does have a very difficult Defense. Plus, he was drafted to be our SAM, and I don't think the Eagles will give up on that after just one year.

eaglesalltheway
03-19-2007, 04:47 PM
And I wasn't putting down Meachem, I was just making the same comparison you did.

brat316
03-19-2007, 08:57 PM
now that i think about olsen, and not giving up on Gocong after 1year i think it will either be S or TE mainly Olsen or DE

eaglesalltheway
03-20-2007, 06:34 AM
I doubt we go TE in the first. The organization knows we have too many immediate needs that need to be filled on defense before we can go into TE in the first. It wouldn't surprise me if we drafted Olsen in the first, but it would most likely mean that LJ is not coming back at all, there is no chance. The only way I see the Eagles drafting a TE in round one is if Willis, Griffin, Poz, Timmons, Beason, and all of the good DE prospects are gone. YOu never know with this FO though.

bsaza2358
03-20-2007, 09:36 AM
If Olsen falls to #26, there is no way the Eagles would pass on him. I don't think he will fall, but if he does, you have to take the BPA. If you release Schobel, so be it. Olsen is an amazing talent, and he would represent a fantastic value. Not saying that it is the preferred strategy, but I couldn't fault the team for taking him at #26.

Eaglez.Fan
03-20-2007, 01:59 PM
That's the only way I wouldn't be pissed if we went TE is with Olsen. I really, really doubt he lasts that far but it is possible.

and I'd probably buy an Olsen jersey in a couple seconds after the pick, he's just a beast.

bsaza2358
03-20-2007, 03:12 PM
I wouldn't mind a later round TE pick, like the kid Petrick from Delaware. Early on, I'd prefer we address defense.

eaglesalltheway
03-20-2007, 03:21 PM
I'd much rather get Patrick in the second or third than go TE in the first. We have too many needs that are too big for our defense.

camp_eagles
03-20-2007, 04:12 PM
I do not see a need for a tight end on the first day. L.J. has a nice connection with Donovan and Matt Schobel is a good backup (at least for next year). Besides there are too many needs on Defense to look at a TE on day one.

bsaza2358
03-20-2007, 04:29 PM
I do not see a need for a tight end on the first day. L.J. has a nice connection with Donovan and Matt Schobel is a good backup (at least for next year). Besides there are too many needs on Defense to look at a TE on day one.

If there is a good value available in Round 2 or 3, I'd much rather do that. The one key offensive need for the Eagles is at TE, where Schobel hasn't been great, and LJ is a pending FA. If LJ is not the answer, I'd much rather get someone on the roster now to learn the system before he goes elsewhere.

camp_eagles
03-20-2007, 04:33 PM
I have no problem with getting a TE in rounds 2+ but only if defence is addressed first and if the TE on the board is the best player available.

eaglesalltheway
03-20-2007, 06:06 PM
I have no problem with getting a TE in rounds 2+ but only if defence is addressed first and if the TE on the board is the best player available.

We may go after TE in round two or later if there is no one at a position of need elsewhere that is worth our pick. Welcome to the forum by the way.

bsaza2358
03-21-2007, 09:00 AM
I'm looking for value and impact out of this draft. If there's a TE of value there, he has to be considered. Period.

Can we move on now?

B-Dawk
03-21-2007, 12:22 PM
apparently the eagles have signed montae reagor to a three year deal

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-eagles-reagor&prov=ap&type=lgns

jonbrodo17
03-21-2007, 02:43 PM
i dunno what to think about that. we really needed an oversized run stopper, not a 280 lb. pass rusher so i guess its O.K. i have a feeling that we are going to trade up in the draft using Darwin Walker as trade bait.

Green Kool Aid
03-21-2007, 04:32 PM
What does that say about Bunkley?

And, believe it or not, I think that this whole Bunkley thing impacts Timmons' draft status.

eaglesalltheway
03-21-2007, 06:08 PM
I beleive that either Walker or Rayburn is as good as gone, most likely Walker as trade bait. Honestly, it says nothing about Bunkley. We needed help at DT and we got some. I would have rather gone after a guy like Ian Scott or another run-stuffer, but this is fine.

cunningham06
03-21-2007, 08:34 PM
This probably does mean we are getting rid of Walker. Good riddance he is awful vs. the run. Montae Reagor is a good pass rusher and will be a good rotational player for us. I seriously doubt that we get rid of Rayburn. If we can use him effectively like we did in 2004, he is a valuable piece of our D Line. He has the best bull-rush as well. We didn't pick up Reagor to replace a strong DT who is pretty good against the run with another situational pass rusher.

eaglesalltheway
03-21-2007, 08:48 PM
I am pretty sure it will be Walker as well, but I just thought that Rayburn is a possibility as well.

Auron
03-22-2007, 09:28 PM
Heard you guys might be interested in shopping DT, Darwin Walker for a 4th/5th rounder.

Saints might be interested in re-uniting him next to Hollis Thomas again... anyone give me an overview of him? Strengths, Weaknesses, can he be a solid starter for another team?

we made some Draft day moves like this last year so I wouldn't rule out doing business with you guys again. :D

eaglesalltheway
03-23-2007, 04:12 PM
He is primarily a pass rusher and is not too good against the run. He has had a good number of sacks in his past few years, but is weak at the point of attack. He would be worth a fourth rounder, but no more.

Space Ghost
03-27-2007, 04:09 PM
Wow, you guys are now going to be in a BPA mode for the entire draft now after that trade. You can wave bye bye to first day lineabacker and the people who think you need to get a quarterback by the fourth round...

cunningham06
03-27-2007, 07:34 PM
Wow, you guys are now going to be in a BPA mode for the entire draft now after that trade. You can wave bye bye to first day lineabacker and the people who think you need to get a quarterback by the fourth round...

Not necessarily, this is a pretty good LB class in the 2nd and 3rd round range and we still need to groom a replacement to take over Trott's spot. HB Blades, Buster Davis, Brandon Siler, etc. Or we could draft a WILL prospect such as Rufus Alexander and move Gaither to MIKE. I don't really like the idea of Gaither at MIKE though. Regardless, LB is still a need and I hope we take a first day LB.

eaglesalltheway
03-28-2007, 06:31 AM
We could go after Anthony Waters as well, he would be a great pick up in the third round.

bsaza2358
03-28-2007, 03:17 PM
Waters has a lot of potential. He could work really well in our system.

bsaza2358
03-28-2007, 03:18 PM
I posted this over in the NFL Forum, but I figured you Eagles fans would appreciate it. Dallas fans were going crazy, saying that they were America's Team. I was sick of it, so I went off on them:

Just because the Cowboys call themselves America's Team doesn't mean they're really "America's Team" in any way. That is self-patronizing BS. The Yankees have 26 World Championships and dress in blue and white (with a little red). Baseball is America's Game. The Yankees don't call themselves "America's Team". The Boston Celtics are the most dominant franchise in NBA history. Bill Russell has 11 championship rings. Basketball is an American-made sport. The Celtics hail from the Cradle of American Liberty. They don't call themselves "America's Team".

From now on, I'm going to refer to myself as "America's Poster". I'm sure fans of Bsaza2358 will follow suit. Does this sound selfish, self-serving, and make me look like a douchebag? Absolutely. How do you think the Cowboys look when they spout off with the America's Team crap?

Signed,

Bsaza2358
America's Poster

camp_eagles
03-28-2007, 04:38 PM
I posted this over in the NFL Forum, but I figured you Eagles fans would appreciate it. Dallas fans were going crazy, saying that they were America's Team. I was sick of it, so I went off on them:

Thank you.

cunningham06
03-28-2007, 08:37 PM
Nice nice, america's poster, but America might have dibs based on username.

eaglesalltheway
03-29-2007, 06:22 AM
I like it. Stick it up there crap hole

bsaza2358
03-29-2007, 08:48 AM
Nice nice, america's poster, but America might have dibs based on username.

I'll take that chance...

brat316
03-29-2007, 02:26 PM
so any ways back to dem eagles

bsaza2358
03-29-2007, 02:44 PM
Bhaa, if you have a topic of discussion at this point, feel free to propose it! We are only 30 days before the draft!

brat316
03-29-2007, 05:01 PM
SO i was on nfl.com my homepage and i saw the Griffin wasnt listed at one of the top 5 safties by vic carucii any thoughts on that and also any one see us getting Merriweather or Rouse

Merrieather can play both S and Cb but becuase of his lack of height he is more of a hitting corner,
Rouse with his extra big height is another intersting S prospect

So any of body see us getting either of them in the First or Moving down getting them late first or second round

camp_eagles
03-29-2007, 07:03 PM
SO i was on nfl.com my homepage and i saw the Griffin wasnt listed at one of the top 5 safties by vic carucii any thoughts on that and also any one see us getting Merriweather or Rouse

Merrieather can play both S and Cb but becuase of his lack of height he is more of a hitting corner,
Rouse with his extra big height is another intersting S prospect

So any of body see us getting either of them in the First or Moving down getting them late first or second round

Griffin is there he is the third on his list.
http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/10095914

DragonFireKai
03-29-2007, 08:14 PM
SO i was on nfl.com my homepage and i saw the Griffin wasnt listed at one of the top 5 safties by vic carucii any thoughts on that and also any one see us getting Merriweather or Rouse

Merrieather can play both S and Cb but becuase of his lack of height he is more of a hitting corner,
Rouse with his extra big height is another intersting S prospect

So any of body see us getting either of them in the First or Moving down getting them late first or second round

Meriweather will likely be there in the 2nd round. This draft doesn't have a lot of WOW prospects, but it's very deep. We could get Eric Weddle in the Third, or Sabby Piscatelli in the fourth, and they won't be much of a step down from Griffin. I'd still prefer for the Eagles to lock up one of the 5 prime linebackers in the first, so I don't have to watch Gaither, McCoy, Gocong, or Jones anymore.

brat316
03-29-2007, 08:24 PM
No you probably will be watching Gaithers and McCoy not sure on GoCong,

Gaithers is staying on the starting line up,
McCoy is probably Nickle package with his speed
GoCong will come when Spikes is tired

DragonFireKai
03-29-2007, 08:25 PM
No you probably will be watching Gaithers and McCoy not sure on GoCong,

Gaithers is staying on the starting line up,
McCoy is probably Nickle package with his speed
GoCong will come when Spikes is tired


*Shudder*

Shoot me now. Not a single one of those three is servicable in our defensive system.

cunningham06
03-29-2007, 08:29 PM
*Shudder*

Shoot me now. Not a single one of those three is servicable in our defensive system.

Gaither was excellent for us last season, he was racking up tackles and our defense became MUCH more productive when he came in. I don't see how you could say he isn't even "serviceable."

DragonFireKai
03-29-2007, 08:42 PM
Gaither was excellent for us last season, he was racking up tackles and our defense became MUCH more productive when he came in. I don't see how you could say he isn't even "serviceable."

Too undisciplined. He blows containment on nearly every outside play they threw at us. He pushes up too often and is a liability in coverage. He's a mediocre tackler. The main reason why the defense improved when he came in is because while Gaither is a Mediocre tackler, McCoy has tackling skills comperable to Deon Sanders.

I can name five Linebackers available in the draft who would start for us right out the gate, that says volumes about our Linebacking corps.

Sniper
03-29-2007, 09:26 PM
First of all, I'd classify Gaither as a decent tackler, not mediocre. McCoy is flat out awful, but Gaither is decent. As far as him being undisciplined, give the kid a break man. He's a sixth round rookie who was thrown into the starting lineup halfway through the year. Can't really base it off of 8 games or so. I was pleasantly surprised by Gaither this year. However, pretty much any linebacker in the first 2-3 rounds could start for the Birds

cunningham06
03-29-2007, 10:24 PM
Too undisciplined. He blows containment on nearly every outside play they threw at us. He pushes up too often and is a liability in coverage. He's a mediocre tackler. The main reason why the defense improved when he came in is because while Gaither is a Mediocre tackler, McCoy has tackling skills comperable to Deon Sanders.

I can name five Linebackers available in the draft who would start for us right out the gate, that says volumes about our Linebacking corps.

What do you expect, he's a rookie! He is not a liability in coverage, he gave up some plays but rarely did he really screw over our defense by being unable to cover. He's very solid when it comes to tackling. He was tested a lot, and he rose to the occasion. He is the only playmaker we had at LB last season. While he may not have made the tackle on every outside containment play he often disrupted it enough to allow someone to knife in and make the tackle. Gaither was our best LB last season IMO, and does not need to be replaced.

DragonFireKai
03-29-2007, 10:39 PM
What do you expect, he's a rookie! He is not a liability in coverage, he gave up some plays but rarely did he really screw over our defense by being unable to cover. He's very solid when it comes to tackling. He was tested a lot, and he rose to the occasion. He is the only playmaker we had at LB last season. While he may not have made the tackle on every outside containment play he often disrupted it enough to allow someone to knife in and make the tackle. Gaither was our best LB last season IMO, and does not need to be replaced.

Being better than Matt McCoy or Chris Gocong isn't saying much. That's like saying that Aaron Brooks doesn't need replacing because he was the best QB on the Raiders. He's still nowhere near being a good starter, and as such, he should be replaced. Gaither would be an excellent backup, but he's a fringe starter at best. If Willis, Timmons, Beason, Alexander, or Posluszny are available when we pick, we should take them.

brat316
03-29-2007, 10:54 PM
I see S as much bigger need next would be D line then Lbs
and according to the eagles they think that you can plug in LBs the true playmakers come on the Dline and in the secondary,

And i see what they mean, the type of lb they require are ones that can blitz and get through the line (Gocong) the Line crates the real pressure forcing the qb to throw the ball in the secondary where either its incomplete or a pick and the S help with run support, espically since we really use one S deep becuse of our 46 D

cunningham06
03-29-2007, 11:52 PM
Being better than Matt McCoy or Chris Gocong isn't saying much. That's like saying that Aaron Brooks doesn't need replacing because he was the best QB on the Raiders. He's still nowhere near being a good starter, and as such, he should be replaced. Gaither would be an excellent backup, but he's a fringe starter at best. If Willis, Timmons, Beason, Alexander, or Posluszny are available when we pick, we should take them.

I don't understand how you can insinuate that Gaither was a fringe starter. He was very good when he played for us, he was an impact player, and improved in each game. He's fast and makes a lot of plays which we have lacked at LB for some time. He's strong and displays good awareness, he is an above average starter in this league.

eaglesalltheway
03-30-2007, 06:31 AM
I don't understand how you can insinuate that Gaither was a fringe starter. He was very good when he played for us, he was an impact player, and improved in each game. He's fast and makes a lot of plays which we have lacked at LB for some time. He's strong and displays good awareness, he is an above average starter in this league.

Agreed, I don't know what this guy was expecting out of him. He is a rookie wh came in half way through the year. Last year he was average as a WILL, but as he matures, I beleive he will possibly be a very good WILL for us. I don't know what this guy is talking about.

Green Kool Aid
03-30-2007, 10:48 AM
So, now that Spikes is here, it looks like safety may be our biggest need. Luckily, that may alos be the BPA at pick 26. With that in mind, here are my preferences:

Laron Landry (a fan can dream)
Michael Griffin
Reggie Nelson

I put Griffin over Nelson, but just slightly. Nelson is a little lighter, and always seems to be dragged along in a tackle. He's more of a freelancer, and goes for the big play. Griffin commands respect the field, and can push a defense. Besides, Griffin is a killer. He's the true definition of a safety; the las line of defense. He doesn't let anyone get by.

The other thing is that we may need the rookie to step in and play SS from day one. Nelson is definitely not a SS, but Griffin could play the position. His tackles register at LB-like numbers. Of course, all that could change if you move B-Dawk to SS, and let the rookie play FS, but why not let Considine get a shot at FS (although I think he's too slight to even play FS.

I left Meriweather off because of height and character issues. He is limited to FS or CB. There is also the guy from Virginia Tech who is 6'4". He can play SS, but he has the same coverage issues that Michael Lewis had. He might even have to play LB. Plus, he's from Va-Tech, which produces nothing but problems.

However, when all is said and done, I'm pretty sure the Iggles will go DE. Watch out for Charles Johnson or Anthony Spencer, and for the Eagles to take a second round safety, like Eric Weddle. Even faced with a situation where they have to pick between say Johnson or Griffin, they would go with their philosophy over talent and pick a DE over a safety in the first round.

I am open to suggestions.

bsaza2358
03-30-2007, 11:33 AM
I feel like the Eagles would rather move back in the draft for extra picks this year or for a future first rounder. They have most of their starers set, and there are a bunch of young guys on the team. I actually see them looking at S or CB early, but an offer for an extra first rounder in next year's draft could mean a ton... Think about it.

DragonFireKai
03-30-2007, 02:02 PM
I don't understand how you can insinuate that Gaither was a fringe starter. He was very good when he played for us, he was an impact player, and improved in each game. He's fast and makes a lot of plays which we have lacked at LB for some time. He's strong and displays good awareness, he is an above average starter in this league.

Because he's the antithesis of what we need in our linebackers for jim johnson's blitz heavy system. You need disciplined players who are skilled tacklers and efficient in zone coverage and man coverage versus backs and ends. We've never really had a good OLB the past few years, and we've always been picking too low to get the ones that show up in the draft. As such, a lot of the really big plays we've given up were on Gaither, McCoy, or Jones. They'd blow containment on an outside run, guard grass in the zones, or straight up forget to cover an interior pass catcher who gets released. Further complicating this is Trotter's lack of range, which means he can't clean up what the OLBs screw up. Gaither's more suited for a 3-4 WLB slot. There are several players available who would be a much better fit than Gaither would be. In addition, there aren't any other players available at where we are picking that would provide an immediate upgrade at a starting position. Maybe at safety, but that's only if we trade up to get Landry.

sirsmokealot28
03-30-2007, 03:14 PM
if we got griffin in the first round and for some odd reason sidney rice slipped to us in the 2nd round. but since thats not going to happen, i wish we would draft a WR in the first round thats not freddie mitchell, and wait til later to address the safety need. i just dont think the talent difference at that position is going to make a huge impact, as their are solid guys later. chance are though, we'll take griffin first, and address another need with the 2nd pick. i can't argue with that, its just i want that star wideout. and dont reggie brown me.

brat316
03-30-2007, 04:14 PM
Wow offense in the passing game is not the problem it in the running really not being able to convert on those short third down, i would rather have a bruiser rb in the second then a WR.

Look in the past years when we had mitchell, thrash and pinknston, average to below WR, but we had a running game that was able to like convert on 3rd down = amazing D.

Last year above average WR, running game was good, but not on third down conversion = shakE D not to good not taht bad.

Plus McNabb gets it done with the WR he has, he cant do much about the RB situation, beside tucking the ball and scrambling with it himself


I think some of us forgot about having that power RB, we did sign buckhalter back but i'm not a big fan of him, he is decent though. We were busy deciding which S or LB to take and forgot about that power Back so i think a power rb, if Leonard slips into round 2 somehow we should take him

cunningham06
03-30-2007, 04:30 PM
Because he's the antithesis of what we need in our linebackers for jim johnson's blitz heavy system. You need disciplined players who are skilled tacklers and efficient in zone coverage and man coverage versus backs and ends. We've never really had a good OLB the past few years, and we've always been picking too low to get the ones that show up in the draft. As such, a lot of the really big plays we've given up were on Gaither, McCoy, or Jones. They'd blow containment on an outside run, guard grass in the zones, or straight up forget to cover an interior pass catcher who gets released. Further complicating this is Trotter's lack of range, which means he can't clean up what the OLBs screw up. Gaither's more suited for a 3-4 WLB slot. There are several players available who would be a much better fit than Gaither would be. In addition, there aren't any other players available at where we are picking that would provide an immediate upgrade at a starting position. Maybe at safety, but that's only if we trade up to get Landry.

Yes, our only linebacker with blitzing capabilities (besides McCoy) is the antithesis of what we need for our blitz heavy defense. He is exactly what we need. Once Gaither got into the starting lineup, we only took a beating against the run once against the Skins, other than that no team had a 100 yard rushing game except for the last against the Falcons in which backups were in for much of the game.

Before Gaither, the teams or players listed gained 100 or more yards against us- Vernand Morency (99)- felt like mentioning anyway because he shouldn’t gain that much against anyone, Julius Jones, the Saints, the Bucs, the Jags had over 200 yards, the Skins, Travis Henry (140 something) the Titans also had over 200 yards rushing, Joseph Addai (171) and the Colts had over 200 yards rushing in this game.

Do you see a pattern? Where are you getting that Gaither is not good, honestly I think you are just making things up. Like saying he would be a better fit in a 3-4 defense, which makes no sense.

He has great instincts, and is naturally pretty disciplined, so that problem won’t be around for long.

If you are getting that he is bad in coverage from the Panthers game when Deangelo Williams had a great game receiving, Dhani Jones was covering him several times when he was thrown to. His first 35 yard reception was covered by Dhani. On Deangelo’s TD, Gaither was blitzing, but still made an effort to catch up to him, although he was long gone. He was not Gaither’s responsibility, he was blitzing on what turned out to be a screen play.

So I welcome you to find any information on how he screwed up on a regular basis and is only a “fringe starter” because he is certainly better than that. You have mentioned areas that he needs improvement on but, oddly enough, no examples.

So don't base how he actually plays on where he was drafted, he was excellent for us.

Also, Griffin would be a huge improvement over Considine at SS. Just because he's not the consensus #1 at his position doesn't mean he wouldn't be an upgrade.

Big Mike
03-30-2007, 05:18 PM
Yes, our only linebacker with blitzing capabilities (besides McCoy) is the antithesis of what we need for our blitz heavy defense. He is exactly what we need. Once Gaither got into the starting lineup, we only took a beating against the run once against the Skins, other than that no team had a 100 yard rushing game except for the last against the Falcons in which backups were in for much of the game.

Before Gaither, the teams or players listed gained 100 or more yards against us- Vernand Morency (99)- felt like mentioning anyway because he shouldn’t gain that much against anyone, Julius Jones, the Saints, the Bucs, the Jags had over 200 yards, the Skins, Travis Henry (140 something) the Titans also had over 200 yards rushing, Joseph Addai (171) and the Colts had over 200 yards rushing in this game.

Do you see a pattern? Where are you getting that Gaither is not good, honestly I think you are just making things up. Like saying he would be a better fit in a 3-4 defense, which makes no sense.

He has great instincts, and is naturally pretty disciplined, so that problem won’t be around for long.

If you are getting that he is bad in coverage from the Panthers game when Deangelo Williams had a great game receiving, Dhani Jones was covering him several times when he was thrown to. His first 35 yard reception was covered by Dhani. On Deangelo’s TD, Gaither was blitzing, but still made an effort to catch up to him, although he was long gone. He was not Gaither’s responsibility, he was blitzing on what turned out to be a screen play.

So I welcome you to find any information on how he screwed up on a regular basis and is only a “fringe starter” because he is certainly better than that. You have mentioned areas that he needs improvement on but, oddly enough, no examples.

So don't base how he actually plays on where he was drafted, he was excellent for us.

Also, Griffin would be a huge improvement over Considine at SS. Just because he's not the consensus #1 at his position doesn't mean he wouldn't be an upgrade.

arent you a texans fan?

cunningham06
03-30-2007, 05:29 PM
arent you a texans fan?

I am primarily an Eagles fan, but am also a Texans fan because I live in Houston. I know the Eagles better than the Texans, but I support both teams.

DragonFireKai
03-30-2007, 07:15 PM
Yes, our only linebacker with blitzing capabilities (besides McCoy) is the antithesis of what we need for our blitz heavy defense. He is exactly what we need. Once Gaither got into the starting lineup, we only took a beating against the run once against the Skins, other than that no team had a 100 yard rushing game except for the last against the Falcons in which backups were in for much of the game.

Yes, that's the other teams abandoning the run. The Redskins gave Betts 33 carries, he went for 171 yards. The Giants ran the ball 22 times between Tiki and Jacobs and got 88 yards. The Cowboys ran the ball a whopping 16 times and got 41 yards. Then people realized to stick to the run, with Gaither still in the lineup, the Giants gave Tiki 26 carries, and he ran for 137 yards. The Saints gave McAllister 21 carries and he went for 143 yards. Gaither came into the lineup, and we still gave up 100 yards on the ground in 2/3s of the games.

Before Gaither, the teams or players listed gained 100 or more yards against us- Vernand Morency (99)- felt like mentioning anyway because he shouldn’t gain that much against anyone, Julius Jones, the Saints, the Bucs, the Jags had over 200 yards, the Skins, Travis Henry (140 something) the Titans also had over 200 yards rushing, Joseph Addai (171) and the Colts had over 200 yards rushing in this game.

The 49ers went over 100 yards, but ran the ball 28 times.
The Packers had 99 yards, and ran the ball 28 times.
The Cowboys went over, and ran the ball 39 times.
The Bucs went over, and ran the ball 30 times.
The Jags went over, and ran the ball 46 times.
The Redskins went over, and ran the ball 31times.
The Titans went over, and ran the ball 32 times.
The Colts went over, and ran the Ball 41 times.
The Panthers went over, and ran the ball 23 times.
The Redskins went over, and ran the ball 40 times.
Atlanta went over, and ran the ball 34 times.
The Giants went over, and ran the ball 31 times.
The Saints went over, and ran the ball 37 times.

The Texans went under 100 yards, and ran the ball 20 times.
The Giants went under, and ran the ball 26 times.
The Saints went under, and ran the ball 30 times.
The Giants went under, and ran the ball 22 times.
The Cowboys came in under, and ran the ball 19 times.

When a team went over 100 yards on us, they averaged 33 carries.
When a team didn't reach 100 yards, they averaged 23 carries.
Teams that didn't run for 100 yards on us, all simply gave up on the run.

And when Gaither came in we still gave up well over 100 yards against the Panthers, Redskins, Giants, and Saints.

Do you see a pattern? Where are you getting that Gaither is not good, honestly I think you are just making things up. Like saying he would be a better fit in a 3-4 defense, which makes no sense.

Here's the pattern I'm seeing. Gaither was brought in, and was starting for rematches against Redskins, Cowboys, Saints, and Giants twice. Five matches against already measured foes. The only game in which our run defense actually improved was against the Cowboys, and that was because they ran the ball 20 time fewer, against the Redskins, Saints, and Giants twice, we gave up more yards on the ground then we did in the game in which Gaither wasn't playing.

He has great instincts, and is naturally pretty disciplined, so that problem won’t be around for long.

If you are getting that he is bad in coverage from the Panthers game when Deangelo Williams had a great game receiving, Dhani Jones was covering him several times when he was thrown to. His first 35 yard reception was covered by Dhani. On Deangelo’s TD, Gaither was blitzing, but still made an effort to catch up to him, although he was long gone. He was not Gaither’s responsibility, he was blitzing on what turned out to be a screen play.

So I welcome you to find any information on how he screwed up on a regular basis and is only a “fringe starter” because he is certainly better than that. You have mentioned areas that he needs improvement on but, oddly enough, no examples.

So don't base how he actually plays on where he was drafted, he was excellent for us.

Here's what I'm basing it off of, his play. His play was an improvement over McCoy, but not nearly as much as you make it out to be. He is not a pro bowler in waiting as you seem to be claiming. He's a fringe starter who, with improvement, can become a solid starter, but is unlikely to be a great player.

Also, Griffin would be a huge improvement over Considine at SS. Just because he's not the consensus #1 at his position doesn't mean he wouldn't be an upgrade.

Griffin would be an upgrade over Considine, but not as much of an improvement as Willis, Alexander, Timmons, Beason, or Posluszny would be over Gaither, and one of those players will be available to us with our pick.

cunningham06
03-31-2007, 12:47 AM
Yes, that's the other teams abandoning the run. The Redskins gave Betts 33 carries, he went for 171 yards. The Giants ran the ball 22 times between Tiki and Jacobs and got 88 yards. The Cowboys ran the ball a whopping 16 times and got 41 yards. Then people realized to stick to the run, with Gaither still in the lineup, the Giants gave Tiki 26 carries, and he ran for 137 yards. The Saints gave McAllister 21 carries and he went for 143 yards. Gaither came into the lineup, and we still gave up 100 yards on the ground in 2/3s of the games.

The 49ers went over 100 yards, but ran the ball 28 times.
The Packers had 99 yards, and ran the ball 28 times.
The Cowboys went over, and ran the ball 39 times.
The Bucs went over, and ran the ball 30 times.
The Jags went over, and ran the ball 46 times.
The Redskins went over, and ran the ball 31times.
The Titans went over, and ran the ball 32 times.
The Colts went over, and ran the Ball 41 times.
The Panthers went over, and ran the ball 23 times.
The Redskins went over, and ran the ball 40 times.
Atlanta went over, and ran the ball 34 times.
The Giants went over, and ran the ball 31 times.
The Saints went over, and ran the ball 37 times.

The Texans went under 100 yards, and ran the ball 20 times.
The Giants went under, and ran the ball 26 times.
The Saints went under, and ran the ball 30 times.
The Giants went under, and ran the ball 22 times.
The Cowboys came in under, and ran the ball 19 times.

When a team went over 100 yards on us, they averaged 33 carries.
When a team didn't reach 100 yards, they averaged 23 carries.
Teams that didn't run for 100 yards on us, all simply gave up on the run.

And when Gaither came in we still gave up well over 100 yards against the Panthers, Redskins, Giants, and Saints.

Here's the pattern I'm seeing. Gaither was brought in, and was starting for rematches against Redskins, Cowboys, Saints, and Giants twice. Five matches against already measured foes. The only game in which our run defense actually improved was against the Cowboys, and that was because they ran the ball 20 time fewer, against the Redskins, Saints, and Giants twice, we gave up more yards on the ground then we did in the game in which Gaither wasn't playing.

Here's what I'm basing it off of, his play. His play was an improvement over McCoy, but not nearly as much as you make it out to be. He is not a pro bowler in waiting as you seem to be claiming. He's a fringe starter who, with improvement, can become a solid starter, but is unlikely to be a great player.

Griffin would be an upgrade over Considine, but not as much of an improvement as Willis, Alexander, Timmons, Beason, or Posluszny would be over Gaither, and one of those players will be available to us with our pick.

The other teams abandoning the run happened for a reason. Last season, Green Bay had the #1 pass defense in the NFL. Teams didn't pass against the Packers because they didn't have to. They could just gut them with runs. That was happening to us, but Gaither helped the situation tremendously. Our DT's weren't doing great against the run, so a lot of the blame lies on their shoulders. Having Gaither outside made it where it wasn't a sure thing to get a first down by pounding the ball over and over again. This gave us more control by forcing teams to pass so we could make a play on the ball.

Yes Tiki did, but in that game Lito Sheppard went down with injury so more players had to be played in coverage, thus the run defense suffered. In the Saints game our defensive line was just completely overmatched, especially our DT’s who were a joke that game. Our offense was completely inept until later in the game, and our defense wore down. They weren’t given a chance to rest, so what do you expect to happen?

The fact is right now he is a solid starter, he doesn’t make costly mistakes to the team, can do everything required, and on top of that is a playmaker. That is better than a fringe starter.

You are the only Eagles fan I’ve encountered who has said that Gaither isn’t a good starter. Most of the most respected Eagles posters on here agree that Gaither was above average in his playing time last season.

I’m still waiting for actual examples of plays where Gaither specifically made a mistake and how it was his fault.

Griffin is a bigger upgrade from Considine than Timmons, Beason, Pos, Alexander would be from Gaither. Considine can’t tackle and needs to be replaced. What is truly central to our defense are good run-support safeties, you can see the drop in our run defense once MLew was benched. Considine shouldn’t be starting. Gaither is not a bad tackler, you are completely incorrect on that statement, so that is one thing that he has on Considine.

DragonFireKai
03-31-2007, 01:06 AM
The other teams abandoning the run happened for a reason. Last season, Green Bay had the #1 pass defense in the NFL. Teams didn't pass against the Packers because they didn't have to. They could just gut them with runs. That was happening to us, but Gaither helped the situation tremendously. Our DT's weren't doing great against the run, so a lot of the blame lies on their shoulders. Having Gaither outside made it where it wasn't a sure thing to get a first down by pounding the ball over and over again. This gave us more control by forcing teams to pass so we could make a play on the ball.

What Gaither did was make the Tackle when he was in position. That strengthened the defense against the interior run, which we were initially just terrible at. However, he was very often caught out of position on runs to the outside. He gave up a lot of yardage to QB runs, reverses,and counters to his side. We've never used defensive tackles who are great in run support, we've always used one gap penetrators like Patterson and Walker. Run support has always been keyed by the second level of the defense in our defense.


Yes Tiki did, but in that game Lito Sheppard went down with injury so more players had to be played in coverage, thus the run defense suffered. In the Saints game our defensive line was just completely overmatched, especially our DT’s who were a joke that game. Our offense was completely inept until later in the game, and our defense wore down. They weren’t given a chance to rest, so what do you expect to happen?

The fact is right now he is a solid starter, he doesn’t make costly mistakes to the team, can do everything required, and on top of that is a playmaker. That is better than a fringe starter.

You missed the Steve Smith reverse to his side that gave up 15 yards, or the runs by Romo and Delhomme that went right through his area of responsibility, or the Tiki and Reggie counters to his side that he bit completely on. He's given up big plays quite often, because he plays out of position. What he hasn't done as often, is hit a ball carrier and slide off ineffectually.

Griffin is a bigger upgrade from Considine than Timmons, Beason, Pos, Alexander would be from Gaither. Considine can’t tackle and needs to be replaced. What is truly central to our defense are good run-support safeties, you can see the drop in our run defense once MLew was benched. Considine shouldn’t be starting. Gaither is not a bad tackler, you are completely incorrect on that statement, so that is one thing that he has on Considine.

You seem to be extremely concerned about the run defense, which makes your desire for a first round safety baffling. There are 3 safeties who might be available to us at 26. Reggie Nelson, Brandon Meriweather, and Michael Griffin. The knock on all three is that they're weak in run defense, because they lack the bulk and strength to stand up in the box and take on blockers. All three are better known for their pass coverage skills. Griffin, in particular, was singled out for being caught out of position and taing too many false steps. The switch to Considine wasn't motivated over the run defense, it was motivated by Lewis' problems in pass coverage. The best run defending safeties in the draft are Landry, Eric Weddle, Aaron Rouse, and John Wendling. With the exception of Landry, any of them would be available in the later rounds.

cunningham06
03-31-2007, 12:33 PM
What Gaither did was make the Tackle when he was in position. That strengthened the defense against the interior run, which we were initially just terrible at. However, he was very often caught out of position on runs to the outside. He gave up a lot of yardage to QB runs, reverses,and counters to his side. We've never used defensive tackles who are great in run support, we've always used one gap penetrators like Patterson and Walker. Run support has always been keyed by the second level of the defense in our defense.

You missed the Steve Smith reverse to his side that gave up 15 yards, or the runs by Romo and Delhomme that went right through his area of responsibility, or the Tiki and Reggie counters to his side that he bit completely on. He's given up big plays quite often, because he plays out of position. What he hasn't done as often, is hit a ball carrier and slide off ineffectually.

You seem to be extremely concerned about the run defense, which makes your desire for a first round safety baffling. There are 3 safeties who might be available to us at 26. Reggie Nelson, Brandon Meriweather, and Michael Griffin. The knock on all three is that they're weak in run defense, because they lack the bulk and strength to stand up in the box and take on blockers. All three are better known for their pass coverage skills. Griffin, in particular, was singled out for being caught out of position and taing too many false steps. The switch to Considine wasn't motivated over the run defense, it was motivated by Lewis' problems in pass coverage. The best run defending safeties in the draft are Landry, Eric Weddle, Aaron Rouse, and John Wendling. With the exception of Landry, any of them would be available in the later rounds.

Again, you don't know what you're talking about. 28 of Romo's rushing yards came from runs up the middle. He only made one big gain scrambling up the middle in the first half. That is not Gaither's side, nor his responsibility. The rest of his runs came with less than 5 minutes on the clock in the fourth quarter when we pretty much had the game won. We were covering the big play, and would let him have his scrambles. Gaither was covering Julius Jones for much of the game. The Steve Smith reverse is a play he could have made, but expecting a rookie to bring down Steve Smith on a reverse in his first career start is asking a lot.

As for your claim that we were getting killed by runs to the outside, that also is not true. What we were getting killed by were runs up the middle, and outside runs that cut in. Dhani was horrible all season as usual, but Gaither did a very good job against runs outside, and forced several to move inside, but sadly his supporting cast was unable to stop the play quickly.

Yes, we use 1-gap DT's in our defense, but to assume we don't value DT's who are good against the run is just stupid. We want players who can make plays against the run, not just leave that responsibility to the second level. Walker was horrible against the run, and he's not here anymore. Does that tell you anything? We've never used a DT who is great against the run? How about Corey Simon? He did a very good job vs. the run, and our defense was much better because of it.

As for Tiki's counters, which are you referring to? That's a pretty broad subject. Are you talking about his counter for a TD? That one was a counter that went straight up the gut. Since you brought up the Giants game, here's a few things that Gaither did well in that game. He had two nice tackles for a loss on Tiki, which Tiki doesn't allow to happen very much, he almost always can turn something out of nothing. He also sacked Manning to make it third and 26, which led to a punt.

So far you have displayed absolutely no knowledge of draft prospects. You very obviously have not seen Griffin play, which I'm starting to believe the same about Gaither, but whatever. Griffin is very good in run-support, and very willing. Sometimes he doesn't make the tackle because he goes for the big hit, but that's correctable. As for what he's known for, he's widely acknowledged as one of the biggest hitters in this years safety class. Nelson is good in run defense too, his tackling technique needs some work, and like Griffin he goes for the knockout hit too much, but overall he's pretty good. Also, Merriweather is good against the run too. All 3 of these prospects are very willing to help out against the run, and are quite good at it. Nelson is the worst of the three, but is still good. In his last two seasons, Griffin has amassed 250 tackles! Yet he is not good in run support? in 2005 Merriweather racked up 115 tackles.

Aaron Rouse=Michael Lewis.

Obviously Michael Lewis was benched for poor pass defense, find an Eagles fan who doesn't know this. What we need is someone who mixes Considine's coverage ability, with Lewis's run defense. The solution is Michael Griffin.

What I bolded is pretty opposite your initial point that he is a weak tackler. Had you watched Gaither play closely enough, you never would have tried to make that point.

DragonFireKai
03-31-2007, 01:24 PM
Again, you don't know what you're talking about. 28 of Romo's rushing yards came from runs up the middle. He only made one big gain scrambling up the middle in the first half. That is not Gaither's side, nor his responsibility. The rest of his runs came with less than 5 minutes on the clock in the fourth quarter when we pretty much had the game won. We were covering the big play, and would let him have his scrambles. Gaither was covering Julius Jones for much of the game. The Steve Smith reverse is a play he could have made, but expecting a rookie to bring down Steve Smith on a reverse in his first career start is asking a lot.

Gaither was in a flat zone on Romo's and Delhomme's runs, and was in the best position to make the play. I don't give a player slack based on experience level if I think that another player could do a better job. It may be asking a lot, but if I could ask another player and they could deliver, then get the guy who'll produce.

As for your claim that we were getting killed by runs to the outside, that also is not true. What we were getting killed by were runs up the middle, and outside runs that cut in. Dhani was horrible all season as usual, but Gaither did a very good job against runs outside, and forced several to move inside, but sadly his supporting cast was unable to stop the play quickly.



Yes, we use 1-gap DT's in our defense, but to assume we don't value DT's who are good against the run is just stupid. We want players who can make plays against the run, not just leave that responsibility to the second level. Walker was horrible against the run, and he's not here anymore. Does that tell you anything? We've never used a DT who is great against the run? How about Corey Simon? He did a very good job vs. the run, and our defense was much better because of it.

Corey Simon was a 289 lb speed tackle coming out of FSU. He happened to be effective against the run. I'm not saying that we don't value run defense, I'm saying it's secondary to the pass rush. We'll take Broderick Bunkley over Haloti Ngata, and we'd take Amobi Okoye over Alan Branch if we decided to take a tackle this draft. We search for a tackle on the free agent market, and we get Monte Reagor, despite many tackles who are vadtly superior against the run.

As for Tiki's counters, which are you referring to? That's a pretty broad subject. Are you talking about his counter for a TD? That one was a counter that went straight up the gut. Since you brought up the Giants game, here's a few things that Gaither did well in that game. He had two nice tackles for a loss on Tiki, which Tiki doesn't allow to happen very much, he almost always can turn something out of nothing. He also sacked Manning to make it third and 26, which led to a punt.

I'm not saying that Gaither is a player with no redeeming qualities, he is simply the starter with the greatest disparity between his own talent and the available talent we can select in the draft. He has made some plays, and was our best OLB last season, but that doesn't give him a free pass in my book, as it seems to in yours. A Paul Posluszny or Jon Beason would fit our defense much better, and is available to us.

So far you have displayed absolutely no knowledge of draft prospects. You very obviously have not seen Griffin play, which I'm starting to believe the same about Gaither, but whatever. Griffin is very good in run-support, and very willing. Sometimes he doesn't make the tackle because he goes for the big hit, but that's correctable. As for what he's known for, he's widely acknowledged as one of the biggest hitters in this years safety class. Nelson is good in run defense too, his tackling technique needs some work, and like Griffin he goes for the knockout hit too much, but overall he's pretty good. Also, Merriweather is good against the run too. All 3 of these prospects are very willing to help out against the run, and are quite good at it. Nelson is the worst of the three, but is still good. In his last two seasons, Griffin has amassed 250 tackles! Yet he is not good in run support? in 2005 Merriweather racked up 115 tackles.

High number of tackles does not equal good in run support. Here's some anaylsis from the NFL prospect profile.

Better playing on the move than inside the box, as he will get caught up in trash and lacks active hands in attempts to shed … Gets a bit overaggressive at times and though he has the speed to recover, he needs to be a bit more patient and let the play come to him … Good form tackler, except when he has to recover from over pursuit (will then take arm swipes in attempts to make the play) … Lacks the lower body strength to split double teams and will take a wide loop at times in attempts to penetrate, knowing he lacks the hand technique to shoot the gaps and counter moves of blockers in attempts to pressure the pocket … Because he is better in space than inside the box, he might be a better fit for free safety at the next level … Has good strength, but is not known for exploding behind his tackles

Every one of those negatives is listing problems with his ability to play in the box.

From ESPN

Overmatched in the box. Lacks Lower-Body Strength. Gets caught peeking into the backfield. Overpursues at times and takes himself out of tackling position. Takes some false steps and needs to be coached to improve recognition skills. Minor Durability concerns.

Once again, the exact same complaints, undersized and has trouble in the box.

From NFLDC

OK but not exceptional size. Will miss some tackles trying to deliver the kockout blow. Is not super-instinctive, and depends on his athleticism too much. Struggles with massive blockers in the box and gets manhandled. Will he be durable and able to hold up physically considering his frame and style of play?

Once again, can't hold up in the box.

Ask yourself, where do our strong safeties play? Most of the time, they're in the box. They have to deal with blockers, they have to sift through trash, they have to hold their own in a phone booth. Every resource, and every Texas game I've watched says that is Griffin's weak point.

Aaron Rouse=Michael Lewis.

Obviously Michael Lewis was benched for poor pass defense, find an Eagles fan who doesn't know this. What we need is someone who mixes Considine's coverage ability, with Lewis's run defense. The solution is Michael Griffin.

What I bolded is pretty opposite your initial point that he is a weak tackler. Had you watched Gaither play closely enough, you never would have tried to make that point.

You are under the impression that a good tackler is simply someone who can hang on. That's not true. A good tackler is somone who takes good angles and makes the play at the soonest possible point, who wraps up securely and drives the ball carrier back, who can stack and shed blockers to get to the play. A mediocre tackler is someone who merely makes the tackle if he can get to the play, but doesn't drive the ball carrier. A bad tackler is someone who arm tackles too much, and as such gets snapped off. Gaither falls into the middle catagory, McCoy into the latter.

cunningham06
03-31-2007, 02:08 PM
Gaither was in a flat zone on Romo's and Delhomme's runs, and was in the best position to make the play. I don't give a player slack based on experience level if I think that another player could do a better job. It may be asking a lot, but if I could ask another player and they could deliver, then get the guy who'll produce.

Exactly, he was in the flat, not in the middle, thus it was not his responsibility. So you don't think rookies won't learn from their early mistakes? There are plenty of talented veterans who couldn't tackle Steve Smith out in the open. Delhomme's RUN was not Gaither's responsibility. Again, Romo ran the ball up the middle on his first 16 yard run of the game, not to Gaither's side, like you said.

Corey Simon was a 289 lb speed tackle coming out of FSU. He happened to be effective against the run. I'm not saying that we don't value run defense, I'm saying it's secondary to the pass rush. We'll take Broderick Bunkley over Haloti Ngata, and we'd take Amobi Okoye over Alan Branch if we decided to take a tackle this draft. We search for a tackle on the free agent market, and we get Monte Reagor, despite many tackles who are vadtly superior against the run.

You're just speculating that we would take Bunkley over Ngata, because we didn't have that choice. The Eagles expressed interest in both prospects. We got Reagor to replace Walker, who it was pretty obvious was gone once we got Reagor. The reason that we have taken DT's as early as we have is because it's easy to find a DT who is good at pass rushing but bad against the run, and vice versa later on in the draft, but in the first round you are capable of finding someone who can do both. Bunkley, and Corey Simon are both examples of this.

I'm not saying that Gaither is a player with no redeeming qualities, he is simply the starter with the greatest disparity between his own talent and the available talent we can select in the draft. He has made some plays, and was our best OLB last season, but that doesn't give him a free pass in my book, as it seems to in yours. A Paul Posluszny or Jon Beason would fit our defense much better, and is available to us.

Pos is a horrible fit in our defense, and Jon Beason is an overrated prospect out of Miami, I don't want either at all.

High number of tackles does not equal good in run support. Here's some anaylsis from the NFL prospect profile.

When you have a college safety getting well over 100 tackles, it's not a sure thing, but it's a pretty decent indicator that they are helping out against the run. You can read all the profiles you want on him, you seem to be completely incapable of taking it for what it is. What you need to learn is that with first round talent, there aren't as many gaping holes in their game to write about, so draft profiles will usually be pretty similar with weaknesses, and blow them out of proportion. The point here is that he is good in run-support. Some say he is better than Landry. You said that Griffin, Nelson, and Merriweather are weak in run support. You were completely and incontrovertibly wrong. I watched Griffin play all season since I watched every UT game, and he is good at supporting the run. Will he have to put on some weight to play SS? Sure, most players coming out of college have to put on some weight. He is certainly capable of doing so.

Here is a pretty direct and obvious quote from NFLDC's profile of him: "Supports the run well."

Nelson? "Is more than willing to come up and help support the run"

Merriweather? "Reliable tackler who can lay the lumber and will play the run"

There are negatives for each of them, but overall, Griffin and Merriweather are very good against the run, and Nelson is pretty good as well. They are not "weak" against the run like you said. Your arguments oddly keep changing.

Ask yourself, where do our strong safeties play? Most of the time, they're in the box. They have to deal with blockers, they have to sift through trash, they have to hold their own in a phone booth. Every resource, and every Texas game I've watched says that is Griffin's weak point.

Again, most college players have to put on weight when they transition from college to the NFL. Honestly, Griffin didn't get manhandled much at all when he played in the box this season. Griffin can probably gain about 10 to 15 pounds, and he will be fine in the box.


You are under the impression that a good tackler is simply someone who can hang on. That's not true. A good tackler is somone who takes good angles and makes the play at the soonest possible point, who wraps up securely and drives the ball carrier back, who can stack and shed blockers to get to the play. A mediocre tackler is someone who merely makes the tackle if he can get to the play, but doesn't drive the ball carrier. A bad tackler is someone who arm tackles too much, and as such gets snapped off. Gaither falls into the middle catagory, McCoy into the latter.

A good tackler is someone who rarely misses tackles, and brings the ball carrier down once he has wrapped up or gotten his hands on him. What you are talking about are other aspects of the game, such as anticipation, pursuit, and awareness. Gaither wraps up well and doesn't miss many tackles. Thus he is a good tackler. If you think he has problems with his angle of pursuit then say so. Your stance in this argument has changed quite a bit from his "weak tackling ability" that you referred to earlier.

DragonFireKai
03-31-2007, 02:44 PM
Exactly, he was in the flat, not in the middle, thus it was not his responsibility. So you don't think rookies won't learn from their early mistakes? There are plenty of talented veterans who couldn't tackle Steve Smith out in the open. Delhomme's RUN was not Gaither's responsibility. Again, Romo ran the ball up the middle on his first 16 yard run of the game, not to Gaither's side, like you said.

Just because you aren't lined up directly in front of the QB doesn't mean it's not your responsibility, especially when the safeties are in deep coverage, the players in the flat need to be able to close up the middle quickly.


You're just speculating that we would take Bunkley over Ngata, because we didn't have that choice. The Eagles expressed interest in both prospects. We got Reagor to replace Walker, who it was pretty obvious was gone once we got Reagor. The reason that we have taken DT's as early as we have is because it's easy to find a DT who is good at pass rushing but bad against the run, and vice versa later on in the draft, but in the first round you are capable of finding someone who can do both. Bunkley, and Corey Simon are both examples of this.

Bunkely, Simon, and Patterson were valued more for their pass rush than their run stopping. You've switched your argument from the Eagles require run stopping to the Eagles prefer pass rushing out of convenience. If the Eagles wanted a run stuffer, they would have replaced Walker with a run stuffer. They didn't, because it's not what they use.

Pos is a horrible fit in our defense, and Jon Beason is an overrated prospect out of Miami, I don't want either at all.

Posluszny is an instinctive Linebacker who doesn't miss tackles, sorts throught trash well, takes excellent angles to the play, and acted as the leader of an excellent defense in college. How exactly is he a bad fit?

As for Beason, his speed and short area power works well in the defense. Sounds to me that you simply have a bias against Miami.


When you have a college safety getting well over 100 tackles, it's not a sure thing, but it's a pretty decent indicator that they are helping out against the run. You can read all the profiles you want on him, you seem to be completely incapable of taking it for what it is. What you need to learn is that with first round talent, there aren't as many gaping holes in their game to write about, so draft profiles will usually be pretty similar with weaknesses, and blow them out of proportion. The point here is that he is good in run-support. Some say he is better than Landry. You said that Griffin, Nelson, and Merriweather are weak in run support. You were completely and incontrovertibly wrong. I watched Griffin play all season since I watched every UT game, and he is good at supporting the run. Will he have to put on some weight to play SS? Sure, most players coming out of college have to put on some weight. He is certainly capable of doing so.

Who says Griffin is better than Landry, I haven't seen anyone, save Michael Huff, claim that Griffin was better then Landry.

Here is a pretty direct and obvious quote from NFLDC's profile of him: "Supports the run well."

Nelson? "Is more than willing to come up and help support the run"

Merriweather? "Reliable tackler who can lay the lumber and will play the run"

There are negatives for each of them, but overall, Griffin and Merriweather are very good against the run, and Nelson is pretty good as well. They are not "weak" against the run like you said.

One sentance saying that they're willing to support against the run, and then a paragraph on why they don't work well in the box, and overpursue, which is fatal in our defense. The inability to work inside isn't crippling in most defenses, because they don't bring up the safties as much as we do. With the safeties up, we don't have the margin for error that other teams get, so their ability not to get engulfed is paramount.

Your arguments oddly keep changing.

My argument has remained constant, that Gaither is the starter on the team whom we get the most value replacing. You've been the one who's gone around in circles trying to justify his position. You were the one that claimed that the saints ran one us because he wasn't in the lineup, when we actually did worse against the Saints rushing offense with him in the offense. You then shifted your argument to blaming Considine for these problems. This showed a fundamental shift in your argument, going from "Gaither makes our Run defense better" to "Gaither isn't the reason why it sucks."

Again, most college players have to put on weight when they transition from college to the NFL. Honestly, Griffin didn't get manhandled much at all when he played in the box this season. Griffin can probably gain about 10 to 15 pounds, and he will be fine in the box.

A safety who was considered undersized in college will remain undersized in the NFL, even if he puts on a few pounds, because while he does get bigger, so does everyone else on the field. Griffin needs to put on 10 pounds to remain where he is, weak in the box. If he remained at 195 pounds, at his build, he'd get destroyed.

A good tackler is someone who rarely misses tackles, and brings the ball carrier down once he has wrapped up or gotten his hands on him. What you are talking about are other aspects of the game, such as anticipation, pursuit, and awareness. Gaither wraps up well and doesn't miss many tackles. Thus he is a good tackler. If you think he has problems with his angle of pursuit then say so. Your stance in this argument has changed quite a bit from his "weak tackling ability" that you referred to earlier.

There's a difference between stopping the ball carrier with your hit, dragging the ball carrier down after a few yards, or outright missing the tackle. It's not as black and white as you make it out to be. While eventually taking the ball carrier down is preferential to outright missing the tackle, there are even better ways to make the tackle.

cunningham06
03-31-2007, 06:02 PM
Just because you aren't lined up directly in front of the QB doesn't mean it's not your responsibility, especially when the safeties are in deep coverage, the players in the flat need to be able to close up the middle quickly.

No it doesn't but you said it was his responsibility and it wasn't. If a qb runs up the middle I expect for Trotter to get him. Our tackles split leaving a gaping hole for him to run up the middle through, in that situation there are maybe 2 or 3 OLB's in the NFL who could have brought him down from where Gaither was to limit him to getting just 5 yards instead of 10.


Bunkely, Simon, and Patterson were valued more for their pass rush than their run stopping. You've switched your argument from the Eagles require run stopping to the Eagles prefer pass rushing out of convenience. If the Eagles wanted a run stuffer, they would have replaced Walker with a run stuffer. They didn't, because it's not what they use.

What I said was that the Eagles do value run stopping ability. I never argued that pass rushing wasn't the most important part. What I commented on was that the way you phrased what you said sounded like you believe the Eagles don't care about run stopping ability at all in DT's. I apologize if you misconstrued what I said to mean that the Eagles want DT's who are good against the run but not the pass. I implied that the DT would be good against the pass.

Posluszny is an instinctive Linebacker who doesn't miss tackles, sorts throught trash well, takes excellent angles to the play, and acted as the leader of an excellent defense in college. How exactly is he a bad fit?

Sorting through trash is one of his weaknesses, along with shedding blocks. Most of our linebackers have problems shedding blocks. Pos is undersized. I really like him, but I don’t think our system is right for him. He would probably dominate in a cover two defense.

As for Beason, his speed and short area power works well in the defense. Sounds to me that you simply have a bias against Miami.

I’m not biased against Miami, I just don’t buy into their hype. Since they have a trusted program and have put out good linebackers, their prospects have become overrated. Beason does not have great measurables, and his college production was pretty average. Yet he is thought of by some as a mid first rounder? He’s a good player, but should not go higher than the second round. Since he is from Miami he is overrated, and in terms of real value, he would be a reach.

Who says Griffin is better than Landry, I haven't seen anyone, save Michael Huff, claim that Griffin was better then Landry.

The key words there are in run support. Landry is clearly better in pass coverage, and better overall, but an argument can be made for Griffin being better in run support. Landry isn’t perfect either. He misses tackles going for the big hit as well. What I like about Griffin is how hard he hits. I think Griffin hits harder than Landry. Landry is more dependable, but Griffin hits hard enough to make the ball shoot out. The godfather of the draft himself, Mel Kiper has said that Griffin is the most feared safety in this years safety class. Kiper compared Griffin to Ronnie Lott, just to paint a picture for you. After all, Landry has “size” concerns too, but like Griffin I expect him to bulk up enough to be fine in the box.

One sentance saying that they're willing to support against the run, and then a paragraph on why they don't work well in the box, and overpursue, which is fatal in our defense. The inability to work inside isn't crippling in most defenses, because they don't bring up the safties as much as we do. With the safeties up, we don't have the margin for error that other teams get, so their ability not to get engulfed is paramount.

I just picked one obvious sentence that is very clear in its meaning, which very clearly proves that you were wrong saying that he was bad against the run. I could find more and post it if you want, but that is pretty clear. I posted that because your original statement was that those 3 safeties weren’t good in run support, which they are and has been clearly acknowledged by just about everyone. Now we are speculating on how these safeties will do in the box in the NFL. Now that Darwin Walker is gone, there is going to be a difference on defense. Bunkley starting should be excellent for the rest of our defense because he has the strength to take on multiple blockers. I like Mike Patterson, and think he can be pretty solid if he has a good DT next to him. If our DT’s next year are able to tie up most of the linemen blocking, then there shouldn’t be as many massive blockers in the backfield to challenge Griffin. If there are, hopefully Trotter could tie them up to allow Griffin to make the play. I doubt that next season we will have to deal with as many offensive linemen in our second level now that Darwin Walker is gone. Griffin may have problems against NFL offensive linemen, but he can handle other blockers with ease.

My argument has remained constant, that Gaither is the starter on the team whom we get the most value replacing. You've been the one who's gone around in circles trying to justify his position. You were the one that claimed that the saints ran one us because he wasn't in the lineup, when we actually did worse against the Saints rushing offense with him in the offense. You then shifted your argument to blaming Considine for these problems. This showed a fundamental shift in your argument, going from "Gaither makes our Run defense better" to "Gaither isn't the reason why it sucks."

No your argument has not remained constant. The only part of it that you have remained consistent in is that you think it would be most beneficial to replace Gaither instead of Considine. In your first posts on Gaither, you claimed that he wasn’t serviceable, that he blows coverage on almost every outside play, and that he is a mediocre tackler. Now you’ve said that he does have some redeemable qualities, we’ve discussed how most of the big outside plays that you credit him for blowing weren’t his assignment, and how he doesn’t miss tackles and wraps up well. I have not changed my position, I have just argued it in different ways. You are arguing that Gaither is not a good starter, which it seems you are reneging on a bit, and I am arguing that he isn’t a bad starter and is in fact pretty good.

I was stating how Gaither made our defense better, so you pointed out that our defense still wasn’t that great, so yes, I had to make the point that some players on our defense weren’t playing well, so the defensive unit as a whole suffered. I’m just using different examples to prove the same point, that Gaither is good. On that point I have not wavered.

As for the Saints game, all the talk before the game was played was, how is Philadelphia going to stop New Orleans passing attack? We weren’t stacking the box as much as usual because of the speed and explosiveness that the Saints receivers had. We also had to play a lot of nickel throughout the game because of how New Orleans likes to put lots of receivers out on the field. Our offense took a long time to get started, and had to punt a lot giving our defense very little time to rest.

The fact is, Considine doesn’t wrap up all that well, so that put a lot of strain on the rest of the defense to make up for it.

A safety who was considered undersized in college will remain undersized in the NFL, even if he puts on a few pounds, because while he does get bigger, so does everyone else on the field. Griffin needs to put on 10 pounds to remain where he is, weak in the box. If he remained at 195 pounds, at his build, he'd get destroyed.

What are you basing this on? How do you know that with an extra 10 pounds he would still be overmatched? He could probably put on 10 pounds this season, and continue to get bigger until he’s around 215, which is a solid playing weight. Michael Griffin was not overmatched in the box in college, but it is assumed that he will in the NFL because he lacks size. Ed Reed is 5’11 200, but he was fine playing SS and playing in the box. Griffin is extremely physical and always finds a way to get to the ball. Chris Hope is 5’11 206, but he can play in the box. Griffin is very capable of being a SS for us.

There's a difference between stopping the ball carrier with your hit, dragging the ball carrier down after a few yards, or outright missing the tackle. It's not as black and white as you make it out to be. While eventually taking the ball carrier down is preferential to outright missing the tackle, there are even better ways to make the tackle.

Gaither wasn’t getting dragged around the field, oftentimes his hits would stop the ball carrier. Sometimes he fell backward while making the tackle, but that happens with just about every player when tackling a RB because oftentimes the running back has the advantage with momentum and falls forward. It’s really pretty obvious to all if you can tackle or not. Gaither can tackle, and he does it well.

America
03-31-2007, 06:06 PM
That is a massive post. My opinion. Gaither is incredibly solid in all areas, just not a standout dominant player. He's reliable and should be a cornerstone for the D for a while.

Green Kool Aid
04-01-2007, 12:43 AM
It's a good thing you can't waste paper on the Internet.

But your wasting memory! Precious memory!

Just kiss and make up.

Gaither was a rookie playing out of position. It's too early to tell.

eaglesalltheway
04-01-2007, 10:46 AM
Lets hope Gaither stays at WILL, that is where I think he ifts our defense best, plus we KNOW what we are getting out of him at this position, and I like it a lot.

jonbrodo17
04-02-2007, 02:18 PM
I don't know why so many people are not so high on gaither. I was very impressed and I think he can only improve

brat316
04-02-2007, 07:49 PM
So how about them DE's we need some new ones,
McDougle = bust
Kearse is old, i see next year to be his last year
Howard didnt make a diffrence, but he was in the league only 8 years, so he still has years left in him at least 3
Cole is good only in rotation or it seems that way so far, and most of his sacks came from teams that give up a lot of sacks though he is getting better
Thomas he seems to be getting better after 7 years,

So some DEs in this draft is very likey, actually come to think of it, dont we pretty much draft a DE every year

cunningham06
04-02-2007, 08:38 PM
Kearse probably has at least two seasons left.

Howard was inconsistent, but when he had everything clicking, he was very good.

Cole is improving, he's pretty good against the run and is refining his repetoire of pass-rush moves.

eaglesalltheway
04-03-2007, 06:29 AM
We have drafted D-line every year for the past few years, but I don't think a DE every year. I have high hopes for our D-line if they are all healthy, but that remains to be seen

jonbrodo17
04-03-2007, 10:13 AM
I always thought that howard is a better DT than DE and Just Imagine...
Cole,Bunkley/Reagor/etc.,Howard,Kearse

bsaza2358
04-03-2007, 11:04 AM
Howard doesn't have the bulk to really hold up at DT over 40-60 snaps a game. His physical skills make him an ideal 2-down DE. He is just big enough that he can slide inside to DT on obvious passing situations (like Reggie White used to do back in the 90's). The drop off in production of making a guy with 12 sack potential a DE would be pretty significant.

neko4
04-03-2007, 07:58 PM
Just wondering, whats good about Bloom?

brat316
04-03-2007, 08:32 PM
return ability

Yo Guys what would be the next safety we pick, or player if Griffin is gone
I think it might be Merriweather or we wait until the second to pick up somone like Weddle
If not Merriweather then i think Brian Leonard, not as a FB but a power RB, something i think we still need, he is a pretty great player you have to give him that, and can be used in many diffrent ways


So what other player might we draft if Griffin is not there

bsaza2358
04-04-2007, 08:49 AM
Bloom is an explosive athlete. He was amazing at returns in college and also has Olympic medals. He is very raw because he was kicked off the Colorado football team for taking endorsement money for his Olympic career. However, he remains incredibly fast and worth a late round flyer for the Eagles.

bsaza2358
04-04-2007, 08:51 AM
Based on Merriweather's disciplinary history, I highly, highly doubt he is on the Eagles draft board. The team doesn't stand for nonsense. Unless they have investigated the incidents and believe them to be isolated, they will likely not draft Merriweather. Still, he got in the middle of a brawl in a college game and was stomping his cleats on the legs of opposing players who were on the ground. The Eagles don't need those kinds of worries, no matter what his ability.

bsaza2358
04-04-2007, 08:53 AM
When the Eagles resigned Buckhalter, it essentially confirmed to the world that Brian Leonard would not be an Eagle this year. Yes, he has talent and size, and he probably would fit into the scheme. However, he doesn't fill a need. The Eagles need a run-stuffing DT. They need some more LB depth. They need CB depth. They need a FS and maybe SS of the future. Leonard would cost the team a second rounder, maybe a third. I don't think the cost/benefit is there.

brat316
04-07-2007, 08:05 PM
Yo Bsaza i just remeber a player the eagles took even though he had character issues, Justice, remeber that incedent with the gun he had on campus, or something like that.

If the Eagles dig a little further in that and find out, i mean i see no reason why he cant be picked except for his size. Come on he was only stommping had hitting a players becuase its the U and Flordia'i was messing with the players so Merrieweather wanted to obviously protect them.

cunningham06
04-08-2007, 01:09 AM
Yo Bsaza i just remeber a player the eagles took even though he had character issues, Justice, remeber that incedent with the gun he had on campus, or something like that.

If the Eagles dig a little further in that and find out, i mean i see no reason why he cant be picked except for his size. Come on he was only stommping had hitting a players becuase its the U and Flordia'i was messing with the players so Merrieweather wanted to obviously protect them.

True, but remember we took Justice in the second round, we traded up because we were considering taking him in the first and were shocked that he was still available. One reason we went for Bunkley was fewer character issues.

Go_Eagles77
04-08-2007, 11:03 AM
Yeah, the only reason why the eagles would pick Meriweather imo is if he fell to the second round and is amazing value, like Justice.

jonbrodo17
04-08-2007, 12:23 PM
I wouldn't mind Meriweather, but realistically they wont take him.

Just wondering, we wouldn't make a move for Kris Jenkins right? we have to be done at DT but i read a "post of the day" on philadelphiaeagles.com that entertained the possibility of us looking at him. He could be exactly what we have all been saying we need(hes 340 pounds) and hes 27 and i doubt they (Panthers) are asking a lot. I would like it but we would have to many question marks at DT and to many players but if they really want a super bowl this year, Jenkins can definately stuff runners. (Of course everybody is going to say it and I know it too, hes injury prone.)

brat316
04-08-2007, 02:50 PM
Yeah I heard Reid say that they are not done in the FA yet

cunningham06
04-08-2007, 07:14 PM
I wouldn't mind Meriweather, but realistically they wont take him.

Just wondering, we wouldn't make a move for Kris Jenkins right? we have to be done at DT but i read a "post of the day" on philadelphiaeagles.com that entertained the possibility of us looking at him. He could be exactly what we have all been saying we need(hes 340 pounds) and hes 27 and i doubt they (Panthers) are asking a lot. I would like it but we would have to many question marks at DT and to many players but if they really want a super bowl this year, Jenkins can definately stuff runners. (Of course everybody is going to say it and I know it too, hes injury prone.)

That would be nice to get him, but he isn't a situational run stuffer. He's a starter, and I doubt we will pursue him because our scheme doesn't call for a massive run stuffer to start, all we need is a situational player. Remember a few seasons back he was regarded as one of the best DT's in the NFL. Another thing is he would be pretty expensive. He is in a $31 mil 5 year contract through 2009 so unless he restructures which IMO he will not do, he would be a big strain on our cap.

bsaza2358
04-09-2007, 08:59 AM
When he was younger and healthy, Kris Jenkins was an absolute beast. However, he has torn up his knee twice, and he really can't handle that kind of playing weight. I think it would be a mistake to trade for him. If he were a FA and were cut by Carolina, a signing would be nice. If he's 29 now, he's pretty much out of his prime already. I can't see the Eagles being able to work out a long term extension that is amenable to both sides here.

machoking6
04-09-2007, 02:22 PM
I forget what all was said in this specific thread, so maybe I'm bringing up something that was already mentioned. Anyways, how would you guys feel if the Eagles traded UP in the draft. I feel that it could definitely be a possibility. I never count the Eagles out on anything come draft day as they are very unpredictable. They've shown a history of moving up (Winston Justice in early 2nd round, Jerome McDougle, Shawn Andrews) so why not? I understand we don't have as many picks as we've had in previous years because we don't have any compensatory picks, so it's a definite possibility that we stay put. All I'm saying is the Eagles could have their eye on someone and they could make it happen. We have enough depth and enough talent on our team that we could sacrifice some picks, whether they be this year or next year. Maybe they have their eye on guys like Reggie Nelson, Chris Houston, or Patrick Willis? I wouldn't be mad if this were to occur. How bout you?

cunningham06
04-09-2007, 02:56 PM
I forget what all was said in this specific thread, so maybe I'm bringing up something that was already mentioned. Anyways, how would you guys feel if the Eagles traded UP in the draft. I feel that it could definitely be a possibility. I never count the Eagles out on anything come draft day as they are very unpredictable. They've shown a history of moving up (Winston Justice in early 2nd round, Jerome McDougle, Shawn Andrews) so why not? I understand we don't have as many picks as we've had in previous years because we don't have any compensatory picks, so it's a definite possibility that we stay put. All I'm saying is the Eagles could have their eye on someone and they could make it happen. We have enough depth and enough talent on our team that we could sacrifice some picks, whether they be this year or next year. Maybe they have their eye on guys like Reggie Nelson, Chris Houston, or Patrick Willis? I wouldn't be mad if this were to occur. How bout you?

I'm all for trading up to leapfrog the Pats to secure Griffin, because right now it doesn't look like a sure thing that he will be there when we pick. We would have to F up our whole draft and give up players to get remotely close to Willis, and even then it wouldn't be a sure thing. Willis is out of our reach now. Reggie Nelson is more of a FS which is what Considine is naturally. Considine is much more effective as a FS, which is why Nelson and Merriweather are unlikely. Griffin would be able to play SS so at safety in the first he's our guy IMO.

If we were to stay put in the first then I would like us to move up in the third and a little in the fourth. There is a ton of good talent in the mid third we could get our hands on.

Chris Houston I'm scared of. He seems like he has a high bust potential. Sure he's really fast, but I'm wary of taking him considering how far he shot up in the draft from his combine numbers. I prefer Marcus McCauley.

As long as we trade up and get our guy then I'm not worried, I trust our FO and scouts they know who's worth it.

machoking6
04-09-2007, 03:13 PM
I'm just not that worried that the Patriots would take Michael Griffin with their first of two selections in the draft. Sure, they need a replacement for Rodney Harrison once he hangs it up, although I'm sure he'll get hurt before that happens. Griffin also provides the ability to play FS if need be. The Patriots love versatility, so ideally Griffin fits the bill. I would imagine that they would place more value on CB or LB. Asante Samuel is hitting that unhappy franchise tagged player snag that all these greedy players appear to hit. The Patriots are known to be quite a stingy organization, so who's to say that they don't come to an agreement to play one more year with Samuel and let him hit the market next year much like the Bills did with Clements? If that were the case then they could have the possibility of drafting CB. Pat Kirwan of NFL.com was quoted as saying, "The Pats are working out all the top corners and Asante Samuels is starting to talk about a trade." Take that for what it's worth. Even if they opted not to go in that direction, what about LB for the Patriots? Bruschi is nearing the end of his career so a guy like Posluszny could fit there. This is all speculation of course, but at least it presents a little optimism for Eagles fans that we can grab a guy like Michael Griffin at 26 without having to make any moves.

bsaza2358
04-09-2007, 03:30 PM
New England has a few needs. S, CB, LB, and OT depth are their primary needs. They also have to get another RB to replace Dillon, but that can be done later in the draft. I wouldn't be surprised to see them take 2 defensive position players in the first round. Scott Paoli has done a really good job in New England with his scouting and such.

cunningham06
04-09-2007, 04:30 PM
I'm just not that worried that the Patriots would take Michael Griffin with their first of two selections in the draft. Sure, they need a replacement for Rodney Harrison once he hangs it up, although I'm sure he'll get hurt before that happens. Griffin also provides the ability to play FS if need be. The Patriots love versatility, so ideally Griffin fits the bill. I would imagine that they would place more value on CB or LB. Asante Samuel is hitting that unhappy franchise tagged player snag that all these greedy players appear to hit. The Patriots are known to be quite a stingy organization, so who's to say that they don't come to an agreement to play one more year with Samuel and let him hit the market next year much like the Bills did with Clements? If that were the case then they could have the possibility of drafting CB. Pat Kirwan of NFL.com was quoted as saying, "The Pats are working out all the top corners and Asante Samuels is starting to talk about a trade." Take that for what it's worth. Even if they opted not to go in that direction, what about LB for the Patriots? Bruschi is nearing the end of his career so a guy like Posluszny could fit there. This is all speculation of course, but at least it presents a little optimism for Eagles fans that we can grab a guy like Michael Griffin at 26 without having to make any moves.

I don't think it's so much that they are greedy, but that the franchise tag offers little to no job security. It's a respect thing too, if you're a good player, you want to work out a deal you can both agree to.

That said I can definitely see the Pats going Aaron Ross at their pick as well. Pos is also an option there for them as well, but I don't trust those coniving Patriots.

machoking6
04-09-2007, 05:21 PM
[QUOTE=cunningham06;288215]I don't think it's so much that they are greedy, but that the franchise tag offers little to no job security. It's a respect thing too, if you're a good player, you want to work out a deal you can both agree to.QUOTE]

The players of the NFL threw respect out the window when they began holding out during their contracts because they felt underpaid. Give me a break. There is no defense or justification that anybody can put up to defend these jerks. It's all greed. They don't care about the franchises that they are in, all they care about is how much money they're going to make in the long run. Samuel's case is the perfect example. Here he is on a great team that's constantly winning. If he's not getting $80 million then he's not satisfied. How can he make less than a guy like Nate Clements, who he's better than? It's all ego with these clowns. The Patriots have to run their organization and look to now, as well as the future. How will paying $80 million help them now? How will it hurt them financially in the future? These are all things that gotta be looked at. Asante Samuel doesn't have to worry about job security. He's not going to be benched, otherwise that would be an idiotic coaching move. He's going to play, and he's going to start whether it's with the Patriots or some other team. Again, there is no defense to this.

cunningham06
04-09-2007, 06:01 PM
Well in Samuel's case, I see no way that he will not play this season, just that he will want out after this season. When players hold out, or don't go to training camp that's ridiculous and I don't support it at all. Just in Samuel's case, it's not necessarily all greed, it's a business and he has to look out for his best interests. At least he plans on playing this season.

jonbrodo17
04-10-2007, 07:17 AM
i have no respect to a player or man who signs a contract knowing what that contract says and then holds out, these guys will never run out of money, that is why i disrespect TO so much

bsaza2358
04-10-2007, 08:45 AM
What other choice do the players who are unhappy with their contracts really have? The NFLPA sacrificed guaranteed contracts for revenue sharing and a salary cap and players' money pool tied to league revenues. It was a brilliant move for all parties because the average and median salaries have increased a ton since that time. The problem with the system is that players cannot release themselves from contracts, and owners can. The player has no weapon other than the holdout. If there was some sort of unbiased, reliable adjudication process for players to go to with contract grievances, it would likely solve a lot of these problems. There isn't one. The player's only weapon is to use the media to push teams for a release, trade, or new contract, or to hold out and pray. The owners hold all the cards there.

bsaza2358
04-10-2007, 08:48 AM
Jon, your assessment of player holdouts being all about greed is an oversimplification. Before he got his new deal, Brian Westbrook was putting up 1500 yards of offense and was the team's top playmaker. He was being paid the rookie minimum with no job security. He was not in a position where he was set for life, and the Eagles weren't giving him the money he was really earning. He held out for a piece of training camp to send a message. Later that very season, a deal was reached where he got a 4 year contract and lived up to the billing.

Some holdouts are necessary to teach the team a lesson. Others are about greed. You have to separate between the two and see things on both sides before casting such judgement.

machoking6
04-10-2007, 09:03 AM
What other choice do the players who are unhappy with their contracts really have? The NFLPA sacrificed guaranteed contracts for revenue sharing and a salary cap and players' money pool tied to league revenues. It was a brilliant move for all parties because the average and median salaries have increased a ton since that time. The problem with the system is that players cannot release themselves from contracts, and owners can. The player has no weapon other than the holdout. If there was some sort of unbiased, reliable adjudication process for players to go to with contract grievances, it would likely solve a lot of these problems. There isn't one. The player's only weapon is to use the media to push teams for a release, trade, or new contract, or to hold out and pray. The owners hold all the cards there.

These players who have been franchise tagged have no reason to be upset with their contracts. They are getting paid an absurd amount of money for one season to play the game that they "love". In Lance Briggs' case, he's getting paid $7,206,000 for one season. In Asante Samuel's case, he's getting paid $7,790,000 for one season. In your opinion, the only weapon for Briggs and Samuel is to hold out because they are unhappy. Unhappy with making that much money? Ludicrous.

bsaza2358
04-10-2007, 09:51 AM
In the open market, these guys could command even higher salaries with more guaranteed money. For both of these players, it is likely an opportunity to get the money they require for the rest of their lives. The Bears and Pats have held these players for a 1-year deal, albeit at a very nice salary. If these guys don't perform as well, they will cost themselves millions. With the setup of the league and the salary cap structure, the players want to sign contracts at the peak of their production. The Franchise tag prevents them from doing this. I'm not arguing on either side here. I think the Tag is a necessary evil. I'm just saying the players have a right to not like it, and I think that teams should avoid using it as much as possible.

jonbrodo17
04-10-2007, 07:11 PM
Jon, your assessment of player holdouts being all about greed is an oversimplification. Before he got his new deal, Brian Westbrook was putting up 1500 yards of offense and was the team's top playmaker. He was being paid the rookie minimum with no job security. He was not in a position where he was set for life, and the Eagles weren't giving him the money he was really earning. He held out for a piece of training camp to send a message. Later that very season, a deal was reached where he got a 4 year contract and lived up to the billing.

Some holdouts are necessary to teach the team a lesson. Others are about greed. You have to separate between the two and see things on both sides before casting such judgement.

I can understand those kind of situations, like what's happening to Ryan Howard and the Phillies

brat316
04-11-2007, 03:04 PM
Yo any of you guys hear about that Considine put on 20lbs of muscle to his already 212 frame, i think he really wants that starting job, obviously S is still a need for competition of Considine and depth, so would it me more likely that second round Safety is going to be picked.

Anyone else think that the eagle might go after Adam Carikker(sp) we know if the eagles want somone they go after them Gocong, anyone see us making a run at him.

Go_Eagles77
04-11-2007, 03:31 PM
Yo any of you guys hear about that Considine put on 20lbs of muscle to his already 212 frame


I'm pretty sure he added 20 pounds to more of a 195-200 frame, he lost a lot durin TC to the end of the season.

brat316
04-11-2007, 04:47 PM
In that case that i guess he is now 212, not bad still i guess he should think of adding on a bit more get to a nice 225-220 he still has until next year, when i think he might take over B-dawks jobs, hopefully he retires instead of going elsewhere

jonbrodo17
04-11-2007, 07:44 PM
i heard about that, I don't know what to make of it, I guess its a good thing, but it doesn't just turn him into another player

cunningham06
04-11-2007, 08:27 PM
I read that on the Eagles website a while back. I don't know how much the added weight will really help in run support, that's just not naturally what he's good at. We still need a replacement at SS.

LitoSheppard
04-11-2007, 08:51 PM
Sorry this has nothing do to with the topic, but can i have some positive rep? :D

brat316
04-11-2007, 09:52 PM
come back with some interseting information

cunningham06
04-12-2007, 12:05 AM
Sorry this has nothing do to with the topic, but can i have some positive rep? :D

I already gave you some because I liked your ideal draft, but you've got to earn your rep. Anyway it doesn't really matter what your rep is because a lot of the people on this site(not eagles fans of course) are just douchebags, so who cares what they think?

LitoSheppard
04-12-2007, 07:51 AM
I Can't participate in any GM drafts because of my low rep, that's the only reason i give a crap about it.

eaglesalltheway
04-15-2007, 09:50 AM
I think Considine is our future at FS, and adding 20 lbs will not change that, it has more to do with his style of play.