Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: About the new QB coach ...
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Zero
Reading this I've gotta say he sounds like a good hire. Foles still has to be considered a young QB. He's had a different position coach each year he's been in the league and he needs come settling and some continuity. It's also possible that the Eagles will draft a QB as insurance, maybe early. This is a critical hire, let's hope it's a good one!
QUOTE
“My philosophy is to always be on the attack, always be aggressive, and to create as much conflict as we can on the defense,” Day said. “We’re going to do that in a lot of different ways. “We’re going to have to be aggressive, we’re going to try to play fast, we’re going to always be on the attack, play tough, play hard-nosed with a lot of energy, and those are the key components to being successful.”
QUOTE
He showed an ability to adapt his style to the team’s talent during his two years running BC’s offense. In his first season he organized a power running attack behind Heisman finalist Andre Williams, who rushed for more than 2,000 yards. Last season, Day took advantage of quarterback Tyler Murphy’s running ability and mixed in an option game that helped knock off then No. 9 USC and lead the Eagles to a 7-6 record.
nephillymike
I have concerns about the hire.

Nothing against Day, but just the process.

You can extrapolate that philosophy to the draft also.

The law of averages say that if you narrow your search and or drafting scope to guys who coached with or played for you before, your talent pool is not as deep as if you include all coaches or all players in your drafting/coaching scope. As a result, the talent drafted or signed as coaches will not be as good. If you go to the next level and expand that search/draft to PAC 10 teams only, you improve but are still more limited than a nationwide search would be.

Taken one step further, there's very little chance that Day is one of the top QB coaching candidates for this job. We settled for the familiar. Hopefully we don't do that for the GM spot, but I think we will.

Mariota is the exception as most every draft analysis has him near the top. My guess is not every coaching analysis had Day near the top.

Chip had Huff as a second rounder, we reached a little for him in the 3rd. He had Hart as a 3rd rounder, we reached a little for him in the 5th. The pattern of reaching for the familiar is a concern.
JaxEagle
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 25 2015, 08:06 AM) *
I have concerns about the hire.

Nothing against Day, but just the process.

You can extrapolate that philosophy to the draft also.

The law of averages say that if you narrow your search and or drafting scope to guys who coached with or played for you before, your talent pool is not as deep as if you include all coaches or all players in your drafting/coaching scope. As a result, the talent drafted or signed as coaches will not be as good. If you go to the next level and expand that search/draft to PAC 10 teams only, you improve but are still more limited than a nationwide search would be.

Taken one step further, there's very little chance that Day is one of the top QB coaching candidates for this job. We settled for the familiar. Hopefully we don't do that for the GM spot, but I think we will.

Mariota is the esception as most every draft analysis has him near the top. My guess is not every coaching analysis had Day near the top.

Chip had Huff as a second rounder, we reached a little for him in the 3rd. He had Hart as a 3rd rounder, we reached a little for him in the 5th. The pattern of reaching for the familiar is a concern.

Wel said Mikey. I agree. I know I have said it before but I am not ready to gamble on Mariota.
Zero
We were fond of saying "watch what he does, don't listen to what he says" when Reid was here. Everyone seems to agree that, if nothing else Kelly is a smart guy. There are plenty of people in NovaCare that will remind him of the Dream Team to avoid rebuilding through FA and it doesn't take a city of intelligence to realize that moving up for Mariota would be an extremely high expense ... probably in both prospective talent as and current players. I can't figure a way that getting Mariota would make this team better for the foreseeable future. I think Kelly thinks enough of the kid to investigate the cost but will not seriously pursue him.

Will other teams think he's really trying to make that trade? If so, and he doesn't will they assume he's going to make a move for Hundley? Maybe he's really OK with Foles and brought in a coach who has experience adapting the scheme to the player and will try to draft someone like Grayson or Bennett and sign someone like Locker.
Zero
One more thing on Day. It seems that Kelly has been pretty good at bringing in good coaches. Barwin, Kelce, Sproles and Parkey were all first time participants. Sure, their selection has something to do with talent but Barwin and Sproles have been in the league for 8 and 10 years respectively and didn't get there until now. The defense was pretty good last year considering the dearth of talent in the defensive backfield. What most of us thought would be a dismal pass rush in April proved to be pretty good and an underachieving 4-3 DE did well in spot duty as an OLB.

As a side thought, what part did Kelly play in bringing those players to the Eagles? Maybe our concern over his talent evaluation isn't as warranted as we think.
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.