Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Chip (Jimmy) Kelly (Johnson)
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Zero
McLane writes an interesting perspective on Kelly's first draft.
QUOTE
Kelly attempted to lure Ertz to Oregon. He would have likely chased Barkley, but the quarterback committed early to Southern Cal, which his father attended. He said he also offered a scholarship to seventh round defensive end Paul Kruger and tried to get seventh-round cornerback Jordan Poyer to walk on.

With the Eagles' top pick and some of their late-round ones, Kelly mentioned the role conversations with those from the coaching fraternity played in the selections. He leaned on Oklahoma coach Bob Stoops before taking tackle Lane Johnson fourth overall. He dialed up North Carolina State offensive coordinator and former Eagles assistant Dana Bible prior to poaching safety Earl Wolff in the fifth round.
nephillymike
This concerns me a little.

With so much of his focus being the PAC 12 players he saw or guys he recrutied out of HS, I wonder if some of his scouts were disappointed he didn't select highly rated players from other conferences.

It's unlikely that so many of the best players available come from Kelly's relatively focused sphere of influence while a college coach. Is it likely that 50% of the BPA come from that sphere?? (Barkley, Poyer, Kruger, Ertz)?
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 28 2013, 07:23 AM) *
Is it likely that 50% of the BPA come from that sphere?? (Barkley, Poyer, Kruger, Ertz)?

First, do we believe that the selection process was a team effort even though we (and this thread) refer to it as a Chip draft? I think it is/was a joint effort putting together their board and that Kelly had as much say as Howie (scouts reports) and Gamble.

Ertz was widely rated as the second best TE and a potential first rounder. That he fell into Kelly's sphere of familiarity was a bonus. Similar situation with Barkley, it didn't extend to their first or third picks and I'm not sure it matters much either way when we're talking about the seventh round but I'd lean towards a plus for familiarity that late in the draft.

Am I contradicting myself? Kelly needs players he feels will buy into his approach, especially in his first year. All other things being equal, I think it's a positive that he would lean towards guys who he has had some experience with. I'm kind of surprised he didn't draft any of his Oregon players.
nephillymike
I'm especially happy he didn't have the chance to pick Jordan.
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 28 2013, 08:04 AM) *
I'm especially happy he didn't have the chance to pick Jordan.

Me too, even though that was my guess on who he'd pick. Jordan may turn out to be a great player but I agree with whoever said that he's a classic boom or bust player.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 28 2013, 06:23 AM) *
This concerns me a little.

With so much of his focus being the PAC 12 players he saw or guys he recrutied out of HS, I wonder if some of his scouts were disappointed he didn't select highly rated players from other conferences.

It's unlikely that so many of the best players available come from Kelly's relatively focused sphere of influence while a college coach. Is it likely that 50% of the BPA come from that sphere?? (Barkley, Poyer, Kruger, Ertz)?

I would say it's possible that we stuck to the board/BPA, but Chip's experience against those individuals influenced where they fell on said board.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Apr 28 2013, 07:27 AM) *
Me too, even though that was my guess on who he'd pick. Jordan may turn out to be a great player but I agree with whoever said that he's a classic boom or bust player.


I agree that Jordan is likely to disappoint from a production perspective relative to his draft position. I still think he'll be a solid, disruptive player. From a positional perspective, I would have much preferred him to Johnson.
With that said, the ridiculous run on on first round OL increases the value of the Johnson pick.
JaxEagle
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 28 2013, 07:23 AM) *
This concerns me a little.

With so much of his focus being the PAC 12 players he saw or guys he recrutied out of HS, I wonder if some of his scouts were disappointed he didn't select highly rated players from other conferences.

It's unlikely that so many of the best players available come from Kelly's relatively focused sphere of influence while a college coach. Is it likely that 50% of the BPA come from that sphere?? (Barkley, Poyer, Kruger, Ertz)?

I agree with the cause for concern but right now we just have to hope that he is right!

To me this is really no different than the Titans trading up to take a Tennessee Volunteer or the Dolphins selecting 4 players from University of Florida. It happens everywhere.
HOUSEoPAIN
Pro Bowlers by Conference.

That's a pretty good link, showing the NFL pro bowl rosters by conference and school.

It's not like the PAC-12 is a slouch conference, 15 pro bowlers last year. It shouldn't be a surprise that the players Chip has had the most experience with are paid the most attention to. If he started picking Ivy Leaguers, THEN I'd be concerned.
D Rock
I could see it going either way.

I'm going "glass half full" here and saying that we benefit from chip having mor info on these guys due to his relative proximity.

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.