Next Day Thread: Eagles II (Ctrl+ALT+Delete Edition)

[MartinC]

If there are semi reasonable deals on the table for Sweat (2nd round pick) and Brissett (5th?) - take them. We need draft assets.

[Riggo#44]

3 minutes ago, MartinC said:

If there are semi reasonable deals on the table for Sweat (2nd round pick) and Brissett (5th?) - take them. We need draft assets.

 

I forget where I saw it or heard it, but if they are unwilling or unable to resign Sweat, absolutely deal him. The team is likely to spend this offseason as well so any compensatory pick is going to get wiped out. If they have a 3rd that can become a 2nd. Take it.

[MartinC]

3 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

 

I forget where I saw it or heard it, but if they are unwilling or unable to resign Sweat, absolutely deal him. The team is likely to spend this offseason as well so any compensatory pick is going to get wiped out. If they have a 3rd that can become a 2nd. Take it.

 

As per some of the beat guys thats the deal on the table. A 3rd which becomes a 2nd if he signs a long term deal. I think what I would do is give that team permission to work on that deal with his agent and get the confirmed 2nd. 

[KDawg]

People are making this trade stuff complicated in other threads. It’s not.

 

1. you do not keep either of them on the HOPE that you can get them to re-sign so the new regime can then decide what to do with them… why? 
 A. Nothing says the re-sign and then there is nothing for the new regime to do and we lose on potential RoI

B. Big deals and tags makes dealing them more difficult if the new regime decides to part ways.

 

2. Culture change is needed. And that means parting with some of the guys in the current culture. It doesn’t mean they are the problem. It just means they are used to the problem. 
 

3. If they don’t know if they can get them to re-sign, it’s important to get assets for assets and not to let them walk.

 

4. Both guys are repped by the same agent. You know there are going to be games played to get them both paid astronomically if they are on the same roster. “If you tag him, the other will walk.” Etc. it’s one of the best ways to maximize dollars for their clients.

 

5. IF they want to be here and have had meaningful conversations with the new ownership group about what they want their next contract to look like and ownership feels there is a good chance to get them back, no, you don’t move them.

 

I will assume, if they are moved, ownership did their due diligence and didn’t like the potential of keeping these guys on board and moved for a RoI and to bolster our asset portfolio.

[Warhead36]

My guess is Ron will watch the tape and decide we're close and not trade anyone.

 

And we'll all be cursing up a storm when both guys sign elsewhere this March.

[DWinzit]

1 minute ago, Warhead36 said:

My guess is Ron will watch the tape and decide we're close and not trade anyone.

 

And we'll all be cursing up a storm when both guys sign elsewhere this March.

I can see this except we will begin cursing up the storm tonight

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

My guess is Ron will watch the tape and decide we're close and not trade anyone.

 

And we'll all be cursing up a storm when both guys sign elsewhere this March.

I don’t think this decision is Rivera’s to make. Yes, I understand he has “full control”. I also understand ownership has full control of that full control.

 

I also think the argument that ownership making a move for assets on a lame duck regime is lame and over dramatic.

 

If any of us were owners and we didn’t think we could get these guys to re-sign in the off-season we’d move them… regardless of what Rivera wants.

 

I don’t think it’s indicative of his future as owner, either. Again, over theatric in my opinion.

[Spearfeather]

What still gets me is, we have a 14-3 lead in the second quarter, and Robinson finishes the game with only 10 carries.

[BurgundyBooger]

6 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

My guess is Ron will watch the tape and decide we're close and not trade anyone.

 

And we'll all be cursing up a storm when both guys sign elsewhere this March.

 

Which tape? The two Eagles tapes? Or the Bears and Giants tapes?

[Warhead36]

5 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

 

If any of us were owners and we didn’t think we could get these guys to re-sign in the off-season we’d move them… regardless of what Rivera wants.

 

I don’t think it’s indicative of his future as owner, either. Again, over theatric in my opinion.

I agree with this take. Harris "meddling" in this situation is not the same as when say Snyder would meddle in the past. 

 

But I still think ultimately Harris will let Rivera make the decision. Basically hand him his own rope to hang himself with.

[Skinsinparadise]

Eagles, Lions among other rebuilt during Ron's tenure from worse to where they are now.   It sucks that we got a FO with no imagination and this year they were grossly incompetent.  But I am confident it can be turned around fast with a new regime

 

 

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Llevron]

9 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I agree with this take. Harris "meddling" in this situation is not the same as when say Snyder would meddle in the past. 

 

But I still think ultimately Harris will let Rivera make the decision. Basically hand him his own rope to hang himself with.

 

I dont see why you would let Rivera make decisions that effect you long term when you know he wont be here next season by now. 

 

For the record I would trade one of Chase or Sweat - my preference is keeping Sweat - and then trading whoever else we can get for whatever else we can get it for. I really like what the Giants did in basically buying draft picks for players with contracts too big to trade. Seems like something we should absolutely lean into if we had the people in the building to do it. I don't think we do yet. 

[Skinsinparadise]

16 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I agree with this take. Harris "meddling" in this situation is not the same as when say Snyder would meddle in the past. 

 

But I still think ultimately Harris will let Rivera make the decision. Basically hand him his own rope to hang himself with.

 

Listening to Keim, I get the vibe he gets the vibe that if Harris wants a move to be made, Ron will feel that vibe but then ultimately Ron will make the call.  In other words, if Harris wants them to build draft capital and Ron pushes back it ironically would seal the deal for him to be gone.  or something like that.  I don't know if that's Keim's guessing.  My guess is its an educated guess from Keim.  Standig said something similar.

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

6 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

For the record I would trade one of Chase or Sweat - my preference is keeping Sweat - and then trading whoever else we can get for whatever else we can get it for.

Seems like it’s only us on this island. 
 

I see a lot of talk about trading Sweat and keeping Chase, and that’s just a no for me.  I sort of understand why, as Chase was the #2 pick in his draft and seen to be a generational talent.  I haven’t seen that here and don’t think we ever will.  If he ever realizes his potential, it’s likely going to be in a new area code with new coaches.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Seems like it’s only us on this island. 
 

I see a lot of talk about trading Sweat and keeping Chase, and that’s just a no for me.  I sort of understand why, as Chase was the #2 pick in his draft and seen to be a generational talent.  I haven’t seen that here and don’t think we ever will.  If he ever realizes his potential, it’s likely going to be in a new area code with new coaches.

 

I know Keim has said multiple times this regime everything being equal would want Sweat over Chase.  But the wildcard here seems to be that sentiment is shared around the league with Sweat apparently being more in demand.

[Llevron]

2 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Seems like it’s only us on this island. 
 

I see a lot of talk about trading Sweat and keeping Chase, and that’s just a no for me.  I sort of understand why, as Chase was the #2 pick in his draft and seen to be a generational talent.  I haven’t seen that here and don’t think we ever will.  If he ever realizes his potential, it’s likely going to be in a new area code with new coaches.

 

I honestly think Chase still has the talent to play like that. I think the system and the coaching are his problem. Simply put, if he was in a role like Parsons where the defense used him to basically blow up the play and not rely on him to contain it, he would look like a whole other player. And in that light, I could understand why people want to hold on to him. But I don't think you let people like Sweat leave the building point blank period. And certainly not for anything less than we can use to replace him which in my mind is a 1st. 

 

IMO Chase = High Ceiling, really Low Floor. And I think his current production can be replaced by people behind him on THIS roster. 

 

IMO Sweat = High Ceiling, High Floor. I still think he can get better with better coaching, but he plays his current role way better than Chase does. Again, bad coaching putting him in no position to look good and he still looks good. Reminds me of a better (maybe more talented is a better term) Andre Carter and I know some of you will scoff at that. 

 

I just think Sweat is too hard to replace and the 2nd at best we get for him wont help us do it.  

 

 

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I know Keim has said multiple times this regime everything being equal would want Sweat over Chase.  But the wildcard here seems to be that sentiment is shared around the league with Sweat apparently being more in demand.

 

I would trade him in a heart beat for a first. But I don't think we get that. It would be very Redskins for us to trade away a guy the entire league would have on their roster for less than he is worth. Keim has a good read on seemingly everything. I love that he is covering this team. 

[Koolblue13]

45 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

My guess is Ron will watch the tape and decide we're close and not trade anyone.

 

And we'll all be cursing up a storm when both guys sign elsewhere this March.

Next Week- Ron "there's a trade deadline?"

[MartinC]

42 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

What still gets me is, we have a 14-3 lead in the second quarter, and Robinson finishes the game with only 10 carries.

 

It was good game plan. Replaced runs (against the best run D in the NFL) with short passes. WCO in its pure form.

 

Eagles only ran 6 times more than we did on the game - and for less yards!

[Riggo#44]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

IF they want to be here and have had meaningful conversations with the new ownership group about what they want their next contract to look like and ownership feels there is a good chance to get them back, no, you don’t move them.

 

Sweat saying last week that he hasn't heard anything on a contract extension is worrisome, if they don't move him. I am all for trading just about whoever to stockpile resources for Not RonMart.

[Spearfeather]

37 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

It was good game plan. Replaced runs (against the best run D in the NFL) with short passes. WCO in its pure form.

 

Eagles only ran 6 times more than we did on the game - and for less yards!

 

I mean, he averaged almost six yards a carry. Granted, one run was for 29 yards, but still,  I would have tried to slow the game down. 

In our last six games,  Robinson has 56 carries, so about nine carries a game, or a little over two carries a quarter, and we've gone 1 - 5.

In our first two games he had 37 carries.

I know we were down early in a couple of those games, which changes the play calling of course, but such a drastic difference. 

It looked like we took the same approach this time against Philly as we did last time. 

With remarkably simular results. 

[Warhead36]

I think people need to look at overall game context before looking at pass attempts vs. run attempts.

 

We had an end of half and end of game two minute drives, which will always be 100% pass. That inflates the count some.

 

We were also extremely successful throwing the ball. Why get away from that?

[MartinC]

9 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

 

 

With remarkably simular results. 

 

Yep. Over 30 points.

[Spearfeather]

5 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

Yep. Over 30 points.

 

And two losses.

 

Last year against Philly we were down 14 - 7. Robinson had 26 carries.  

We also scored over 30 in that one.

 

And won by 11.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Warhead36]

The strength of this team is the passing game, particularly a strong armed QB throwing quick passes to speedy WRs. We need to see MORE of that, not less.

 

Utilize your strengths. Balance for the sake of balance is worthless.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

 

And two losses.

 

Last year against Philly we were down 14 - 7. Robinson had 26 carries.  

We also scored over 30 in that one.

 

And won by 11.

You seem to be equating that we lost because we threw the ball too much. But we moved the ball and scored those points by throwing the ball. We lost because the defense couldn't stop a nose bleed and our coaches made a couple of big time blunders.

 

Last year was a different animal. We had a noodle arm QB and had to rely on an insane ratio of run to pass. The Eagles were also a lot weaker against the run last year(IIRC right after losing to us they signed a couple of FA DTs).

 

Again, gotta understand game context.

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

The difference is that Campbell isn't also GM, they paired him with Brad Holmes who has been killing it. Their rookie class this year in particular has been outstanding. And every single one of the guys they took were guys that would fill needs for us(although Gibbs was taken before our pick).