Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Draft positioning
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
TGryn
The NFL playoff picture standings at http://www.nfl.com/playoffs/playoff-picture are also useful for quickly figuring out our likely draft position. At 4-10 we're guaranteed to draft no lower than #16, and if the draft were today we'd be drafting around #4-#5 overall. It also gives us some general guidelines for rooting interests in other games: any team with 6 wins or less we're hoping to win, because that helps the Eagles draft position.

For example, this week the best-case scenario would be Jax over Miami (although Miami winning would help us also), Cleveland over Washington, Saints over TB (Bucs win would eliminate them from our draft slot as well, though), Rams over Vikings, Cards over Lions (though with the same record, it doesn't matter much either way), Buff over SEA, Panthers over Chargers, Chiefs over Raiders (again, mostly a wash), and Titans over Jets. The rest are between teams who are actually in the playoff hunt and hence irrelevant for our draft position.
Dreagon
Texas A&M has two awesome offensive tackles who will both go in the first round (barring a disastrous Cotton Bowl). One of them will surely be available when yall's turn comes up. If you guys are going to give Foles a year to see what he's got, it only makes sense to work on the line for him, or the next guy who comes in after him.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (TGryn @ Dec 16 2012, 11:11 AM) *
At 4-10 we're guaranteed to draft no lower than #16, and if the draft were today we'd be drafting around #4-#5 overall. It also gives us some general guidelines for rooting interests in other games: any team with 6 wins or less we're hoping to win, because that helps the Eagles draft position.


I don't see how we win either of our last two games. I think 4-12 is a pretty safe assumption.
TGryn
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Dec 16 2012, 10:48 AM) *
I don't see how we win either of our last two games. I think 4-12 is a pretty safe assumption.

Agreed, with the caveat that the Giants may be resting their starters in the final week, depending on whether the Redskins and Cowboys are still at their heels for the division come week 17. Interdivisional games can be closer than we expect, too - I think teams sometimes develop mutual personal dislikes after seeing the same guys twice a year, year after year, and that can provide motivation that wouldn't be there against an AFC team for example - and both of the remaining games are those.
Dreagon
QUOTE (TGryn @ Dec 16 2012, 02:08 PM) *
Agreed, with the caveat that the Giants may be resting their starters in the final week, depending on whether the Redskins and Cowboys are still at their heels for the division come week 17.


The Giants won't be resting anybody after losing to Atlanta. They just put our destiny back in our own hands, since we have the tiebreakers against them.

Sigh. Unfortunately we're not really playing like a playoff team, what with the entire center of our defense on IR.
TGryn
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Dec 16 2012, 02:23 PM) *
Sigh. Unfortunately we're not really playing like a playoff team, what with the entire center of our defense on IR.

You only have to get in, then anything can happen. We learned that in 2008. Get hot for a few games, and you're in the Super Bowl...and as long as Romo's still standing, that can happen. He can throw 5 TDs at any time, though he's shown this year that he's just as likely to throw 5 INTs.

Looking good against Pittsburgh so far...
Dreagon
QUOTE (TGryn @ Dec 16 2012, 04:19 PM) *
Get hot for a few games, and you're in the Super Bowl...and as long as Romo's still standing, that can happen.



What you're talking about is four straight weeks of "Good Tony" in the playoffs. That would be awesome, but I'll believe it when i see it tongue.gif

Update: Although it was nice seeing Good Tony show up tonight.
D Rock
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Dec 16 2012, 06:42 PM) *
Texas A&M has two awesome offensive tackles who will both go in the first round (barring a disastrous Cotton Bowl). One of them will surely be available when yall's turn comes up. If you guys are going to give Foles a year to see what he's got, it only makes sense to work on the line for him, or the next guy who comes in after him.

Tackle isn't much of a need assuming Peters & Herremins return from injury. Drafting one would allow Todd to go inside to guard, but could be viewed as a luxury.

The defense needs fixing.

mcnabbulous
Draft Geno Smith. I'd rather have two guys battling out to be our QB of the future than anything else.

I like a lot of what Foles has done, but he's no sure bet.
TGryn
Fix the lines first. I'm pretty wary of relying on three injured players all being healthy to be the solution at OL. If you have the chance to get a legit LOT prospect, you grab him, period.
Zero
QUOTE (TGryn @ Dec 17 2012, 07:37 PM) *
Fix the lines first. I'm pretty wary of relying on three injured players all being healthy to be the solution at OL. If you have the chance to get a legit LOT prospect, you grab him, period.
P E R I O D ... but there was always bitching when King Andrew would routinely pick OL first. A solid OL makes for a better QB and a better QB makes for a more consistent offense.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Dec 17 2012, 09:12 PM) *
P E R I O D ... but there was always bitching when King Andrew would routinely pick OL first. A solid OL makes for a better QB and a better QB makes for a more consistent offense.


I'll reiterate that Cleveland and Miami have the best two left tackles in football. Both drafted in the top-5.
TGryn
QUOTE (Zero @ Dec 17 2012, 05:12 PM) *
P E R I O D ... but there was always bitching when King Andrew would routinely pick OL first. A solid OL makes for a better QB and a better QB makes for a more consistent offense.
Funny thing about that is that Reid only drafted an OL in the first round twice: Andrews in '04, and Watkins in '11. He also traded a 1st for Peters, but that's stretching it to include that as well. Everyone assumed that because Reid was an OL originally that he'd show a propensity to overdraft them, but if anything the opposite turned out to be what happened. Just like the whole "Reid always drafts guys out of BYU" - never really materialized.

The guy who was really OL crazy in the draft was Kotite, who used 3 of his 4 first round picks on offensive linemen: Antone Davis, Lester Holmes, and Brenard Williams.
D Rock
The line is bad this year. That'll happen to any team that loses 4 of 5 starters.

Get those guys back and it's not anywhere close to our weakest link. We STILL need linebackers and safeties first, corners second and then O line.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Dec 17 2012, 09:29 PM) *
The line is bad this year. That'll happen to any team that loses 4 of 5 starters.

Get those guys back and it's not anywhere close to our weakest link. We STILL need linebackers and safeties first, corners second and then O line.


And a QB. Regardless of how you feel about Foles, there are question marks. If a guy is available who could be an upgrade, it has to be considered.
ClydeSide
QUOTE (D Rock @ Dec 17 2012, 09:29 PM) *
The line is bad this year. That'll happen to any team that loses 4 of 5 starters.

Get those guys back and it's not anywhere close to our weakest link. We STILL need linebackers and safeties first, corners second and then O line.


If they abandon the Howard Mudd system, Kelce might not fit: he is good pulling and blocking downfield, but he doesn't have a strong base and can't hold position against bigger DLs.
TGryn
QUOTE (D Rock @ Dec 17 2012, 06:29 PM) *
The line is bad this year. That'll happen to any team that loses 4 of 5 starters.
Get those guys back and it's not anywhere close to our weakest link. We STILL need linebackers and safeties first, corners second and then O line.

I hear you, and agree to the extent that you don't go OL just for the sake of going OL. To give an example, OG Chance Wolback (Alabama) is reputedly one of the best guard prospects to come out in a while, but if we're sitting at #4-#5 do we take a guard that high?

But I'd make an exception for elite left tackle prospects, since that's one spot where you really need to be drafting in the top half of the 1st round to get one of those. Joeckel from Texas A&M is that guy this year. It'd be the same if a guy like RGIII or Luck were there at QB this year, but there isn't a QB rated that high in 2013.

2013 draft prospects list:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings
HobbEs
OT is a huge need but this is supposed to be a good draft for linemen. Call me crazy but I'd really love to draft Te'o...even though we may have more pressing needs. Our defense definitely needs someone like him.
mcnabbulous
I don't think Joekel will be there at 4. You definitely don't draft a guard in the top-5 either.


And Hobbes...you're crazy.
Eyrie
QUOTE (D Rock @ Dec 17 2012, 06:23 PM) *
Tackle isn't much of a need assuming Peters & Herremins return from injury. Drafting one would allow Todd to go inside to guard, but could be viewed as a luxury.

The defense needs fixing.

I wasn't impressed by Herremans' play at RT this year. I'd take Joekel if he's there and shift Herremans to G. Then we can focus on defence for rounds 2-4. A veteran CB (DRC, if he's willing to be physical) and S will be a massive step in the right direction as well.
ClydeSide
QUOTE (Zero @ Dec 17 2012, 08:12 PM) *
P E R I O D ... but there was always bitching when King Andrew would routinely pick OL first. A solid OL makes for a better QB and a better QB makes for a more consistent offense.


YES. When we had Stan Walter and Jerry Sisemore, we made a run. When we had Tra Thomas and Jon Runyan, we made a run. When we did NOT have them, we DID NOT make a run. Seems clear to me.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (ClydeSide @ Dec 18 2012, 07:53 PM) *
YES. When we had Stan Walter and Jerry Sisemore, we made a run. When we had Tra Thomas and Jon Runyan, we made a run. When we did NOT have them, we DID NOT make a run. Seems clear to me.


Peters was an all-pro last year.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.