The Consigliere

No, I don't, but I think anyone making long term bets would bet that a team picking 2nd overall after having finished 31st for the 2nd time in 5 years would predict that the ceiling of the team is sub .500 in the short term, especially when its a tear down with a new GM, new HC, and new coach. There are exceptions, but its rare and I find it amusing that everyone that quibbles w/my argument uses the Texans because lets be straight, they can't think of any other (the Niners themselves are actually a good one). They can say what they want for pub, they aren't gonna tell the press that we suck and will be horrible, and I expect Quinn to max whats there, he's solid to good coach (and a great DC), but I don't view what they did in the offseasons as a retooling or recalibration or whatever. I don't buy that at all. I think its pretty clear they were bringing in spackle via FA because we had a ton of cap space unlike the saints, and had the ability to spackle in contracts to temporarily place competent high floor talent in big gaping holes so the defense to some extent was sustainable, so the offense had some base level talent behind Robinson etc.....I think it was spackling, not long term anything, not short term, most of the deals were 2-3, avoiding clogging our cap with onerous long term solutions, or quick fixes, it looks like what I think they're actually doing: w/holes to fill in literally every single position group, and not enough FA cap money or draft capital to fix it, they're plugging as many holes short term as they can while slowly building out the long term roster with young draft picks (and possible trades). Now that's my theory. Maybe I'm wrong. In the real world, Vegas views us as 26th-28th best or thereabouts, and that's more or less what I think too, although I'm on the under in terms of win total (I see 5 or 6, Vegas and the public/maybe sharps, seems to think 6-7 wins....We'll see, but I will quite firmly argue that part of the reason this pick makes sense, and trading Allen could make sense is the nature of the contracts those DT's have, and what this team will be doing the next season or two, which is a whole lot more losing. How much, is open to question. I would argue we are likley to max out, in a best case scenario, of around 15 wins the next two years, but more likely 12-13. Knowing that, I'd trade Allen if I could get a day 2 pick now, or trade him after this season if I could get a 3rd to a 4th (probably not but one can dream). Will they? I highly doubt it. certainly not this season (barring a player demand).

But you forgot to mention that your light fixtures are all about to go out/break in the next 12-18 months and you need to think long term. Allen's deal expires after December '25, and is a tradable asset, Paynes in December '26. Neither is young, either. Both are well into their second contracts as vets as well, not young, and about to exit their primes within a season or two. If you need everything, and the need at DT, which is amongst the hardest and most valuable to fill in terms of draft capital and FA cost (it sits right along Edge, CB, OT, QB and WR). Basically we got a top 15 to 20 player, for 2nd round draft capital. This isn't the Raiders drafting Bowers a year after they drafted Mayer. This is us finding a long term replacement for Allen or Payne in the discount bin, knowing it should be on the show room floor. It's frustrating it wasn't a shiny top 20 rated OT, I agree, but they weren't there and the fact that no OT's were selected between the late first and the late second illustrates that. The first run on OT's went from 5th to 26th (with one more taken after Dallas moved down to 29), the next from 55 to 79, and we pulled one right out of that tier with similar rankings. So to my mind anyway, we basically owned the board, holding off on OT, convinced they would fall, and were proven right, while selecting the best player on our board. That's exactly how I want drafts run. We need everything, yes DT was my exception too, but its not hard seeing the reasoning when you consult spotrac.

Beginning to sound like the love child of Dave Butz and John Randle, and the height/explosion thing sounds a lot like Randle. Yeah, and John Randle. Like not super tall, but explosive as hell. In fairness, Sapp as a college guy was a once a decade type talent, like Suh 15 years later. Sapp should've gone 1.01 but had drug rumors drop him (and I don't think he was going 1.01 anyway, too many stupid GM's). PFF had him I think 11th, maybe 12th can't remember which. It was fortunate he was injured, as he definitely doesn't go round 2 if he's healthy in January/February/March. The more I learn about him the more I feel like we got two first rounders in this draft w/o trading up. Pretty awesome, really genuinely sounds like this guy would normally go in the 8-16 zone (I know he was projected 26th but I think that was in part because of team fit related to size (he's pretty short and not super heavy).

Allen's deal is up in two years, we won't be competitive either of those years, he'll turn 31 the year he's a FA, makes sense to trade for value either now, or in '25 both for us and for him. I can see keeping him around for another year as a mentor to a defense that's getting a lot younger, and being rebuilt from scratch, but whatever he does beyond the locker room will be done in lost seasons, if we could get a 3rd for him, I'd deal him. Doesn't sound like Peters is interested in trading him (at least in '24) so that point is moot unless he comes out and demands it during the summer.

I love the guy too, and dude can do yoga, so at least one of his weaknesses can be addressed if he's open to yoga. Flexibility is something anybody can achieve with practice generally speaking (although if you've got severe particular injuries, sometimes yoga needs to be stopped, at least temporarily), but Yoga should help his flexibility. I will say this though, it hasn't permanently cemented things, it's more started the rebuild at DT for when we lose Allen (in '24 or '25) and Payne (probably '26). I suspect we move on from Allen in '25, and Payne either during '26 or after. This allows us to get in front of those departures so we have an elite piece still on his rookie deal in 26-'27 when we lose one and then probably both of those dudes. I'm not particularly excited for how awesome it makes DT now, as they are empty calorie seasons where we're liable to lose a good 10-13 games, but I do like that he'll be learning under two professionals w/elite careers in their past. Nice way to start his training and hopefully blossoming. DT is one of those weird things over the year, like LT, we've generally been very strong during this 32 year down turn at 2 of the hardest positions to fill with quality talent, hasn't mattered because no QB, now, maybe, hopefully that will finally be different. Like you, needless though it is to say, I'm enthused we landed him. His kind of explosion off the snap is nuts, and a rare trait. Love it. He was one of the best two or three guys on the board at slot at 36 and I'm glad we grabbed him. Great pick if he's healthy. Somebody probably already mentioned it, but it appears the Jones Fracture is the reason behind the fall, had an injury, so he dropped a good 10-25 slots (PFF had him 11th or 12th, which is a strong outlier)

I think the problem with him or at least the biggest one, was the Danny Weurffel problem. He just doesn't have the minimum arm necessary to get it done, period. Then there's all the rest. I don't think VR can fix a base level problem like having insufficient arm strength for the college to NFL leap.

The sneaky thing about Cerrato was that I knew coming in, he'd be a disaster. If Clark and Policy weren't interested in taking him w/them to Cleveland after screwing up the Niners in the later nineties he had to be pretty bad and stories circulated back then of how bad, but what's funny is that beyond the toady nonsense with Snyder, Cerrato's draft CV is vastly better than Casserly's. You compare Casserly '89-'99, and Cerrato '00-to whenever he was ejected ('09 I think?), he was just a D to D+ GM where Casserly was an emphatic F, probably worse than an F. On Ron, as awful as it is to say, considering things you mentioned during this last season, I wonder if he was just flat out demoralized, fighting cancer, working for Snyder, things not working out, clearly on a "you've got 1 year" and knowing there was no chance. I wonder if he just kind of just checked out. He was aware that the only way he'd be back was if Sam Howell was Joe Burrow and the rest of the team stayed healthy and over performed, and neither were likely. I wonder if he just quit in general. Otoh, all his drafts sucked. But yeah, he clearly seemed over it completely this season. It's also worth noting, and I think I mentioned it when he was hired, over here. If you looked at his Carolina CV, it was basically trash. What you saw was pretty obvious, he lucked into the 1.01 in an elite no doubt about QB class (Newton) in his first year. He produced three quality seasons, and one Cam in God Mode Season, and otherwise the Panethers underperformed, and then fell apart as Cam's body fell apart. Whatever happened with the Panthers was largely a product of Cam Newton (and that stud LB didn't hurt either). They were sub .500 in 5 of his 8 years there, never as horrible as we were in '23, but generally speaking, they were largely meh. '11, '12, '14, '16, '18 and '19 were all disappointing. So when things went sideways it was pretty obvious, always, what happened, and that, not coincidentally was part of the reason I was so surprised when he ignored QB in '20 and '21. It was so so so obvious that Cam was everything when he was in Carolina, and just to make do with a 10th to 15th percentile QB room '20-'23 was so utterly asinine it was mind boggling. Then again I guess he did try to solve it with former never was types like Wentz, but he should have known after he was quickly cashiered out of Philly and Indy, that that plan was hopeless. 5am doesn't really move the needle too much though, Joe was that, apparently McVay was that, and I'm that (basically 515-545 wake up time the past 15 years for my work)...but I do like his energy, fire, and the reality that he does seem to max teams out, other than '20 with Atlanta when Ryan was semi-cooked.

But note when the defensive players were drafted, it was less valuable capital: Offense: 2nd pick, 53rd pick, 67th pick, 100th pick (4 of our top 6 picks) Defense: 36th pick, 50th pick, 139th, 161st, 222nd If you actually measure the picks by draft capital value, I wouldn't be surprised if the offense has the bulk of the value. Lets be straight, 139th, 161st, and 22nd's are dart throws from 15-20 feet away, 2nd, 53rd, and 67th? Those are dart throws from 5-7 feet away. To me, they played the board, people are insisting it was a defense heavy draft, but really it was only so on day 3, and on day 3, you are hoping to hit on 1 starter if you're lucky and a reserve for 1 contract. It's the day 1 and day 2 capital that needs to hit and should at least be eventually worth a 2nd contract, and providing some value (especially top 30-50 guys).

maybe it was you, or maybe someone posted him, and it was exciting, getting him as a UDFA feels like we got basically a pair of extra 6th or 7th rounders (along with the other DB we signed who wasn't quite at his level of promise). Very exciting. On Quinn, I'm getting more excited over time, he's younger than I realized, I thought he was more 60ish, but instead he's my older brothers age, which I like, otoh, it looks like in '19 they were top 11-13 in defense, and in '20 they fell to around 23rd or 22nd and much worse in total yards given up. It's rather odd. How much of the change was bringing in a mega superstar in Michah Parsons, but regardless, a top 3ish defense after he arrived. I don't know what to think of it, the dallas d was good in '19, objectively below average to horrible in '20, and very good in '21 (the odd thing is there were a lot more good defenses in '19 than in '21, not sure why). Anyway, I remain a skeptic of the quick turn around idea. I like that we added an elite DT prospect, I don't think there's much argument against the idea that we got a top 20-25 level talent, basically an extra mid to later round 1st round talent in the DT, we probably added 2 defensive players via the draft that will have some degree of immediate impact as rotational support to the secondary and the DL, but with no edge talent really, the LB position got a legit talent, but not a lot behind him via FA, I just tend to think this build out will take 2 or 3 years, and that's fine. I don't expect the D to get back to where it was in '20-'22, I suspect it will be bottom third in '24. That's fine w/me though, long term that would serve us better than a quick jump into the top 10-15. But I am reasonably excited that we did a nice job plugging holes, and adding some nice long term talent infusions to transition to a new era. Really promising. But next year? I still expect us to be bottom 10, probably bottom 5-8, and again, that's fine, we need at least one more really crappy year before attaining mediocrity I'd like to think, and then hopefully advancing to excellent by '26 or '27. Suits me fine and so far so good. One of the things worth noting, also, is there wont be an effort to position for Caleb Williams, Drake Maye, and Jayden etc next year, the QB class still has a couple of first rounders, but even the top guys are a tier below the top 3 to 4 from this year, so that, combined w/whats happened with various teams, suggests to me that only a few might bottom out: Carolina will again, Tennessee can't help, some injuries in the wrong places could do it to Oakland, NYG will probably struggle unless Nickels shows out with Nabers in house, Denver could be a mess and New England, will be a mess, but when I look around the league, not a lot of teams are likely to be god awful: New England, Tennessee, Oakland and Denver, Us, (the whole NFC and AFC South problem is they get to play eachother so probably nobody other than Tennessee and Carolina will totally suck), Arizona is going to bounce back, not sure what the rams will do with an aging QB but they have the potential to collapse with that problem. But really, I do put us in that clump of the worst 7 or 8 teams, we aren't the worst in that pile, but we'll probably be in the middle, with the potential to pick between as high as 3rd or 4th, and as low as 7th to 10th or 11th.

I'm not entirely sold that these guys are made. Actually I'm not sold, though I acknowledge, some of your guys listed, fit that tag perfectly: Hurts, Prescott, in particular stick out as guys that were really suspect coming in. Prescott was lumped in with a tier of busts and they managed to avoid the guys they actually wanted that busted (Paxton Lynch, and then Michigan State guy the Raiders wanted: they had both of those guys ahead of Prescott, both got peeled off, settled for Michael Irvin's guy Prescot, and won), Hurts was more complicated: promising traits, but borderline broken as a thrower, and then turned into a legit passer....But other guys listed I just disagree with. Wilson was a stud, and a transfer, but he was drafted into a league where he was short, and a creator who relied on ahtleticism in a league that distrusted guys his size who ran around (a lot of bust dual threat guys in the later aughts, Locker had just busted etc), I think Purdy was Purdy, just nobody was sure if Purdy could be Purdy, I'm not sure what to think of Love, because I think he's really what he was: he was that arm, that athleticism and that inaccuracy, but there's also no arguing that he seemed to click on last year enough to be a usable starter with a really high ceiling...interesting. Allen, Lamar and Patrick were all ceiling bets to me, I'm sure coaching did some of that, but there was also a reason Allen was #1 on a lot of boards in '17, and Lamar was pretty high on some in '17, and Mahomes always seemed like a guy who was either a grand slam, or a fail, kind of like Daniels, not a lot of middle. Interesting to think about...not sure.... I'm also not entirely sold on the idea that we were 100% about fixing the defense, I really do kinda think we were hitting the board, period, after the Daniels pick. We had needs everywhere so anyone was justifiable.... Seems like 36 was about sorting value: the best WR's were gone, so it was the best DB, best OL, or best DL, and we took the highest rated guy on PFF boards by far. We trade down from 40 and it kind of makes sense, no OT goes between basically the late first and the late 2nd, so it does seem like they thought: We have WR needs, TE need, DB need, LB need, OL need, there will be guys on our board at 50, 53, and 67 in our current tier then, and they were right: The DB they took may not have been tiered with the dude the Eagles took or Kool-Aid, but he was close to it, and we turned a 70something pick into 53 moving up 20 picks by doing it. So we peeled off the best available slot corner, best available athlete TE, and one of the next tier of OT's (after looking through the ranks its clear that Coleman was very much in the same tier of guys that started with Paul, and unlike a lot of them had positional versatility: a big thing for a team like us that needs everything beyond one guard slot and Center).... So to me anyway, it looked like they were working their board and it fell too: 2 their fav QB 36 could not move up for OT, so took best player on board who happened to play D. If one of the WR's fal, do they go WR? I'd like to think Ladd would be considered, but with Ladd and the other guy gone, the DT or a DB made the most sense. 40 trade down: Clearly seems like they viewed this tier as lasting into early round 3, and worth moving down to get 3 instead of just 2. 50 and 53: Take the best corner available that a ton of people liked, take best athlete TE available (and analytics suggests, betting on athleticism w/TE's gets you more hits than any other strategy) then grab 67: Guard who is in the same tier of guys who go between 55 and 79. Seems like it was just: QB, then D, then D, then O, then O, then O, day 3 is mostly D (maybe all D? Can't remember), but day 3 picks are heavily tilted toward dart throws, what tells you the strategy is how they used day 1 and day 2 capital, the most valuable assets, and that was a TE, an OL, a QB, a WR, a DT and a DB. So for me, anyway, I think they were playing that draft music of best player available, and that's how the board fell. There's things I like and things I don't or didn't, but I definitely can see the rationale for everything.

It's so utterly asinine that it underlines why I don't view anyone as good at this, including Peters, hopefully we're just lucky. We deserve it anyway. No team has gone longer without drafting and developing a true franchise QB that mattered than us (Baugh). That being said, I do believe it's totally possible our board could be like that. Boards are always weird. The only thing for sure consensus is either all or nearly all had Caleb #1. After that, I definitely think there was disagreement. I'm a bit bitter we won that final weekend tiebreaker with New England to jump ahead of them, otoh, you fudge with that, and we probably end up 4 instead of 2 rather than 3 instead of 2, but yeah, its tempting as hell to have not jumped New England, and gotten the 3 and Maye instead, except there is a real possibility we would have done something very nutty instead of taking Maye. I don't think I'm wrong about Maye, but considering how bad New England is, and how stupid their 2nd rounder at WR was (Polk), I could totally see Maye looking like trash for a few years. At least they got Baker late, he could be a nice day 3 add, but good lord, Jaylynn Polk ahead of AD Mitchell, Roman Wilson, Troy Franklin etc. Just stupid (to me anyway).

Someone mentioned the jones fracture being a reason for the DT's drop into our lap.

That is a lot. The only one I can speak to really is Sinnott. To me, this draft had Bowers, the surprisingly athletic Sinnott, Jaheim Bell even if size afflicted, and then the guy whose always been #2 for a year but slipped a little in the predraft process in JT Sanders. If we were taking a TE, it was most likely day 2 or a trade down to early day 3 because the only guys worth taking after Bowers were Sinnott, Bell and Sanders, and Bell is a weird size dude. So them taking Sinnott was surprising in terms of how early, but not surprising in terms of who: if we took a TE this year, he was basically one of 2 guys it could be. Hampton and McGee are really interesting to me because both have weird profiled but really promising ones as well. I don't know how to think of McCaffrey at all, Im very inclined to think it was incredibly stupid, but the measurables are exciting and as you like to mention, there's a narrative that could explain things (QB late convert to WR) and suggest he could be promising given a season or two to learn to be a professional big slot etc. When I looked at PFF's rating my eyes basically went like that truck drivers in Pee Wee's Big Adventure.

That's wild, definitely nowhere near clear enough. It is 3 first rounds, but it's a giant tier drop, for meh picks, and a future first that is unlikely to be high as well. I was expecting much better offers than that. Exciting to think about. Do NFL teams use this tech?

This was a chalk opening before people started taking crazy pills. If the top 6 stayed at slot, all 6 were projected to take who was taken, the only exception was Alt, but that was because Vegas was betting San Diego would trade down then take Alt, all of the first 6 were projected to go there if no movement happened. I was briefly feeling like a genius until I realized that odds were, all 6 of those guys would go there, unless anyone jumped into the top 6 (or the Giants moved up from 6). I tend to think Daniels going #2 kind of locked up the slotting, no mad rush for Daniels, and Patriots never got the godfather offer to push them off Maye. Much more impressive would be hitting a wacky draft top 6, this wasn't one of those. Will be interesting to see what happens w/it being chalk, with the fullness of time.

Definitely like the way 6 of the top 10 and 7 of the top 12 fit needs (OT, Edge, CB, WR).

Are we even sure we were picking DeJean at 40? Like everyone else, I had either DeJean or Kool Aid as my preferred target at 36 and 40, not even thinking about the DT (though I love that selection) but why are we so sure, at all, that if we'd stuck at slot, we'd take DeJean. Unless there's a quote, that's really just wishcasting. We hope we would've been smart enough to value him as the best guy w/o a trade down but history suggests the pick would have been off everyone's board, just like 36 was.

I'd argue that we were clearly right to pass on 36 and 40 as the next tier of Tackles after the ones that went 5-26 (and at dallas's pick, 29) as none went in the 2nd round until 55, a good half round after our first second rounder. I think the question going forward will be how the guys pan out from that group of: Paul Fisher Rosegarten Suamataia Coleman Wallace Ameg Basically there was a minor 2nd run at tackle: the first run went 5-29, the second went 55-79, we took I think the 5th of 7 or 8 to go. If Coleman hits, it doesn't matter that we waited until round 3 because we pulled our guy from the same tier, and unlike some of those guys, our guy can play Guard and Tackle, which is almost certainly why we took him: positional versatility. If he misses, and the guys so many of us liked like Pau and Sua, become painful misses. We'll see.

We did that a couple years ago and it meant ---- all. I want great NFL players, the Captain piece is a nice addition if they are legit difference makers, if not, who cares.

Two full offseasons, competitive hopefully by year 3, maybe a 6-8 win team by year 2. If everything works. I know I'm negative, but negative has been correct most of the last six or seven seasons, and Vegas agrees with me, I believe they have us either 26th or 25th best in terms of O/Under wins. I have us around 27th as I mentioned earlier, I'm a little more negative than Vegas, seeing a floor of 4 wins, a ceiling of 7 and an expectation of 5.5 to 6. We had to replace what, 5 or 6 of 8 OL's, our WR's are either exiting their prime in McLaurin's case or coming back from a disappointing sophomore campaign in Dotson's, our TE room is comically bad (hence Sinnott), our RB room are a collection of JAG's athletically and a gifted player that's two years past the RB age cliff, our DL lacks any edge talent to speak of, our LB corpse did get some nice pieces this offseason, but came into FA w/mostly ----, the DB's have had a lot of draft capital invested to little effect....ST's is a good punter and nothing else. It was a ghastly roster, it's still a bad one. We lack depth, and talent. We added some this weekend, and a few guys that will move the needle in FA. It's certainly a negative perspective, but to me, we really earned that 4-13 record, not just by having a disengaged coach and quitting team but really by taking next to nothing of quality out of the past five or six drafts. This really is a build it up through scratch build. Consider it this way, how many of our guys are guys other teams would genuinely want to acquire to significantly improve at any given positional group? Who would other average or good or better teams want? You can point to a Punter, since departed Curl, Jonathan Allen, DaRon Payne, Cosmi, Brian Robinson, Terry McLaurin and our punter. That is it and among those guys there are really only 3-4 guys beyond the punter that are viewed as top 70th percentile or thereabouts at their position. We lack any kind of top end talent largely to speak of, and what we have (Allen, Payne, Cosmi McLaurin) are all over age, save Cosmi. It's dire. No top end talent (guys that would make say an NFL top 100) Little if any top 75th percentile talent. Little depth. Few Starters you'd give a next contract too. That's why I see us as really horrible, the situation is right in the very roots of the org. We are right there with Carolina, Tennessee, Denver, Oakland, and New England etc. It's quite bad. The good news is we added a couple legit plus guys in FA, and our draft haul included probably a good 2-3 guys that could end up plus, and another 2 or 3 that could be league average starters with some breaks. That's progress, but it's still a gazillion miles away from a competitive team. Which is why I want us to suck next year, but have promising developments with the kiddos. We need another 2 offseasons to fix this to the point that there's any chance of this team becoming legit competitive consistently and not a 1 off type like the '99, '05, '07, '12, '15 and '20 squads (and the '20 squad was trash). I'm hoping for 4-5 wins, hopefully no more than 6. That will help. That and Daniels being the hit the FO and the league thinks he is, and not the injury riddled disaster I fear he might be.

Wow, Quinn sounds pretty freaking good. Peters already sounds good. But wow, Quinn doing that? Is either Nixon level neuroticism, or the height of best practices and good process, "reflection" at its finest.

Depending upon which big board your talking about guys like Daniels, Sinnott, McCaffrey were all reaches and all day 1 and day 2 guys. A lot of people disagree on that, it's open to interpretation. I think it's pretty clear that we had an interesting draft with a lot of athleticism and upside, but in terms of landing guys at value, that's basically the DT, the Safety, and the LB, those 3 guys are the 3 we got below where they were expected to go, I think the other 6 were at slot or over slot. Time will tell but for now, in terms of VBD, we reached quite a bit (but I like most of the guys we reached for).

Med red flags, or off the field red flags?

You waste at least half if not more of the rookie deal, and as mentioned, Penix isn't just old, he's exceptionally old, approaching Brandon Weeden/Hayden Hurst level of stupid considering how old he is. I really liked Penix as a value choice when I thought you could get him round 2 or later in round 1, using a top 10 pick on him was asinine, using a top 10 pick when you already gave Cousins the bag, hell multiple bags, is beyond stupid. If it was JJ, it would still be stupid, but at least he's young and with clean medicals throughout his career. Instead you have an old, overage prospect with med flags out the yin yang, who will be 26 before he starts year 3. Its crazy pills. There's a reason the NFL looked at Atlanta and just shook their head in shock, repeatedly like the notorious old raider and jet first round foul ups. People were arguing over the weekend on whether it was literally the worst draft pick ever when all things are considered. It's a good contender but there's worse, for sure.

You have to acknowledge that the eagles are fundamentally in a different spot than the WFT. We simply lack the assets anywhere to justify such long term building strategies. We don't have anything anywhere in depth other than maybe DT, but even DT is an issue because both guys are out on a free soon, and both are aging out of relevance for extensions beyond the length of their current deals. So you can technically justify investments of draft capital pretty much anywhere, everything needs help. I'd like to build a team like the eagles as well, but the eagles have a roster so good, it was in the Super Bowl and probably should've won just 16 months ago. The last time they had back to back sub .500 seasons suggestive of serious roster build problems was '15-'16, or eight years ago and before that they had had back to back 10-6 seasons so it wasn't even that bad in the first place. The WFT has been an abject disaster scene for eight years, the polar opposite of Philly (our last positive back to back seasons were '15-'16, a flip side to Philly's run), and in truth, more accurately, for 32 years. Since that 17-14-1 run, we've been remarkably below average until we imploded completely in '23 (we won 7 or 8 games in '17, '18, '20, '21 and '22). Overall though, the truth is in those ugly numbers, we haven't won more than half our games in 8 years, and won 4 last year. Our record since that last quality playoff appearance ('20 was a joke), 51-78-2 since that crushing loss to Green Bay in the playoffs with Cousins after the early lead. With two seasons in the past five years where we finished bottom 2 in the league, that tells the tale. We can't do what the eagles are doing because we lack any of the assets to do it.