Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Who is our weakest link of the starters
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
nephillymike
Go extra WR and extra CB on the defense, for our top 24 "starters". Assume Matthews, Randall and Algohlar as the 3 WR's and Rowe, Carroll and McKelvin as the three CB's, and assume Wisneiwski as the LG and hte rest should be easy.

Who is our 1st, 2nd and 3rd weakest starters.
mcnabbulous
Agholor, Carroll, Bradford
nephillymike
Agholar, Rowe, McKelvin
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 15 2016, 09:25 PM) *
Agholar, Rowe, McKelvin

I feel good about Rowe. McKelvin is more than capable as a slot guy.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 15 2016, 09:33 PM) *
I feel good about Rowe. McKelvin is more than capable as a slot guy.


Carroll was our best CB last year, rated decently in the league overall.

Bradford would probably be 4th for me, maybe Randall 5th or vice versa.
Joegrane
Agholar

I don't know enough about Wisneiwsk (OG) and McLeod (S) but they might be in the top 3.

Both outside CB spots are somewhat weak. I've never been a big fan of Rowe out there due to poor lateral movement against laterally quick receivers. I think he'd be a stud SS.

At this point, RB makes me nervous due to age, injury history and lack of quality depth. I assume that will be addressed in the draft in round 2 or 3.

Bradford is definitely not one of them.

QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 15 2016, 09:38 PM) *
...

Who is our 1st, 2nd and 3rd weakest starters.
mcnabbulous
Bradford has spent 6 years in the league and never been in the top half at his position. There is no evidence to suggest he's not one of our weaker starters.

Rowe held up nicely as a rookie. I'm excited about his potential.
Eyrie
First two are easy - Wisneiwski and Agholar.

But the third one is tricky. I'd lean towards whoever is opposite Rowe on the basis that I don't know who that will be.
Joegrane
In the second half of last year Bradford did not look like a bottom third QB in the league. That was while only in his first year in a new system, with mediocre WRs and issues on the O Line. I think he'll be a solid QB in a decent system with solid supporting cast. I think the guy has had bad luck with the turnover of coaches and of course poor health. Hopefully he has taken something positive from Chip's sports science guru.

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 15 2016, 11:59 PM) *
Bradford has spent 6 years in the league and never been in the top half at his position. There is no evidence to suggest he's not one of our weaker starters.

Rowe held up nicely as a rookie. I'm excited about his potential.

Reality Fan
I was not going to jump in but what the hell.....

1. Algohar....should not be but until he erases memories of the worst WR I am skeptical

2. Peters......How no one mentioned this is beyond me....regardless of grades by some stat geeks...anyone with an ounce of knowledge of the game and a functioning set of eyes saw that he was a shell of his former self.....when he actually played....his health is a huge concern and an immediate weak spot that ripples down the line.

3. Carroll...worried about his ankle.

I cannot wait for the bullets to fly to see if Bradford was a mirage to end the season or if he is going to be for real....he will have no excuses now. While his WRs are not spectacular he has a legitimate cast and a good TE and what should be a decent line if Peters can play. There will be absolutely no excuses for him being mediocre and both sides of the argument will finally have their answer. I can't, however, call him a weakness.....
mcnabbulous
I considered Peters, but went with Bradford instead. Both have major prove it seasons ahead.
Phits
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Apr 16 2016, 12:58 PM) *
I cannot wait for the bullets to fly to see if Bradford was a mirage to end the season or if he is going to be for real....he will have no excuses now. While his WRs are not spectacular he has a legitimate cast and a good TE and what should be a decent line if Peters can play. There will be absolutely no excuses for him being mediocre and both sides of the argument will finally have their answer. I can't, however, call him a weakness.....

while I'm not his biggest fan, I tend to agree (at this point) he isn't a weakness....just a BIG question mark.
The Franchise
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 15 2016, 09:23 PM) *
Bradford


rolleyes.gif

If we ever need to rank the weakest link on this board for analyzing QB's, I think we all know who wins that one.

With terrible WR's and the terrible Chip Kelly calling plays, he still had a decent season - in the last half of the season he was as good as any QB in the league. Though I'll give it to you, that one game Geno Smith played in he had a better QB rating against the Raiders. laugh.gif
Phits
QUOTE (The Franchise @ Apr 16 2016, 03:03 PM) *
With terrible WR's and the terrible Chip Kelly calling plays, he still had a decent season - in the last half of the season he was as good as any QB in the league.

Perhaps they looked "terrible" because Bradford was terrible? This decent season you speak of is indicative of his entire career. He does just enough to make people question whether he can live up to his potential.
The Franchise
QUOTE (Phits @ Apr 16 2016, 02:30 PM) *
Perhaps they looked "terrible" because Bradford was terrible?


Yes! Agholor and Cooper are superstars in the making, the 50+ drops the team had were because of the terrible Bradford! Brilliant!

Back-and-forths like this tell me you're just a Bradford hater. The guy had an 86 rating with a ridiculous amount of dropped passes and a terrible head coach calling plays. I expect Pederson to utilize Ertz a lot more, and the results will appear.
Phits
QUOTE (The Franchise @ Apr 16 2016, 03:47 PM) *
Yes! Agholor and Cooper are superstars in the making, the 50+ drops the team had were because of the terrible Bradford! Brilliant!

PFF has it listed at 42 (out of 532). Believe it or not, receivers are not the only reason for dropped passes, just like QB's are not the only reason for INT's.

QUOTE
Back-and-forths like this tell me you're just a Bradford hater. The guy had an 86 rating with a ridiculous amount of dropped passes and a terrible head coach calling plays. I expect Pederson to utilize Ertz a lot more, and the results will appear.

- His 86.4 passer rating was less than Ryan Fitzpatrick, Blake Bortles, Ryan Tannehill, Matt Ryan
- His QBR was 41.8. Only Joe Flacco and Nick Foles rated worse than he did. That's not "hate".
- His 2015-2016 season numbers were on par with his career average. Which are underwhelming and not indicative of a special player.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Phits @ Apr 16 2016, 03:30 PM) *
Perhaps they looked "terrible" because Bradford was terrible? This decent season you speak of is indicative of his entire career. He does just enough to make people question whether he can live up to his potential.



You can't watch the tape and blame Bradford if you are objective.....the WRs were subpar because...well...they were subpar....

It is funny how some here say Cooper or Austin or Agohlar sucks and then say that Bradford was the reason in the next breath....at least this year he has Randle who has a demonstrated record of at least being decent...this will be the first year of his career that Bradford will have no excuse for not performing...a good O line and decent targets
Joegrane
I actually agree with you--well, mostly. They all will be learning a new system, but at least Bradford already is familiar with most of his receivers.

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Apr 16 2016, 05:06 PM) *
You can't watch the tape and blame Bradford if you are objective.....the WRs were subpar because...well...they were subpar....

It is funny how some here say Cooper or Austin or Agohlar sucks and then say that Bradford was the reason in the next breath....at least this year he has Randle who has a demonstrated record of at least being decent...this will be the first year of his career that Bradford will have no excuse for not performing...a good O line and decent targets

The Franchise
QUOTE
PFF has it listed at 42 (out of 532).


I know - and their job isn't to watch Eagles games, it's to record stats. 42 is extremely generous, anyone who watched this year should agree.

Personally I didn't like the deal that brought Bradford here, but he's here and he won me over last year. He missed 2014, was thrown out onto the field with a new system, crappy WR's, and a bad HC, and managed to hold his own. In the second half, he looked as good as anyone in the league, with the same issues. He may not be 'special' yet or ever, but he's certainly earned the right to play another year without us throwing away an early pick on another QB. Get him a receiver.
nd9kel
QUOTE (The Franchise @ Apr 16 2016, 02:47 PM) *
Yes! Agholor and Cooper are superstars in the making, the 50+ drops the team had were because of the terrible Bradford! Brilliant!

Back-and-forths like this tell me you're just a Bradford hater. The guy had an 86 rating with a ridiculous amount of dropped passes and a terrible head coach calling plays. I expect Pederson to utilize Ertz a lot more, and the results will appear.


Precisely.
mcnabbulous
Bradford is fucking teflon. He's got six years of mediocre tape, but it's always someone else's fault. It's a good gig if you can get it.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 16 2016, 06:31 PM) *
Bradford is fucking teflon. He's got six years of mediocre tape, but it's always someone else's fault. It's a good gig if you can get it.


You may be correct(your not and I have proven his lack of supporting talent much to your chagrin...or maybe you want to regale me with all the talent he played with...lol) but this year there is no excuse...he has legitimate NFL talent around him.....one of us will be right ...and the other will be ....you.... devil03.gif

But seriously....we will find out this year whether he is worthwhile or not.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Apr 16 2016, 05:48 PM) *
You may be correct(your not and I have proven his lack of supporting talent much to your chagrin...or maybe you want to regale me with all the talent he played with...lol) but this year there is no excuse...he has legitimate NFL talent around him.....one of us will be right ...and the other will be ....you.... devil03.gif

But seriously....we will find out this year whether he is worthwhile or not.

I am not arguing with this. I played the excuse game for Bradford all of last offseason. I hope he gets it done. Rest assured, I'm not one of those loser fans who wants my starting QB to struggle.

My point is that he simply has not done anything to date to be considered anything other than a failure. Hopefully this year is the year, but I'm done making excuses for him.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 16 2016, 05:58 PM) *
I am not arguing with this. I played the excuse game for Bradford all of last offseason. I hope he gets it done. Rest assured, I'm not one of those loser fans who wants my starting QB to struggle.

My point is that he simply has not done anything to date to be considered anything other than a failure. Hopefully this year is the year, but I'm done making excuses for him.


I agree with this, mostly.

Unlike others, I never made excuses for him. A good friend of mine was a STL rams season tix holder and he filled me in.

I hope I'm wrong. If he can be a tad above average, it would be a start.

He seems like a good guy and it would be nice to get a pleasant surprise and it would be great for the team and us fans.

But rest easy Bradford excuse makers.

This WR corps is tailor made for excuses. It's sub par at best and will be there for the taking if justifications need to be found for a 7th season of sub par QB performance. Plug in the usual injury to the WR corps and it will be excuse heaven!!
Phits
How do you 'hold your own' if your coach and receivers are so crappy? or were they only crappy when he struggled? He completed 65% of his passes, 266 yds/game 7.0 yds/att (the most ever in his 6 year career). His numbers were remarkably similar to Mark Sanchez in 2014.

I wouldn't trust either of those QB's as the future of the franchise.

QUOTE (The Franchise @ Apr 16 2016, 05:31 PM) *
I know - and their job isn't to watch Eagles games, it's to record stats. 42 is extremely generous, anyone who watched this year should agree.

Personally I didn't like the deal that brought Bradford here, but he's here and he won me over last year. He missed 2014, was thrown out onto the field with a new system, crappy WR's, and a bad HC, and managed to hold his own. In the second half, he looked as good as anyone in the league, with the same issues. He may not be 'special' yet or ever, but he's certainly earned the right to play another year without us throwing away an early pick on another QB. Get him a receiver.

Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 16 2016, 07:20 PM) *
I agree with this, mostly.

Unlike others, I never made excuses for him. A good friend of mine was a STL rams season tix holder and he filled me in.

I hope I'm wrong. If he can be a tad above average, it would be a start.

He seems like a good guy and it would be nice to get a pleasant surprise and it would be great for the team and us fans.

But rest easy Bradford excuse makers.

This WR corps is tailor made for excuses. It's sub par at best and will be there for the taking if justifications need to be found for a 7th season of sub par QB performance. Plug in the usual injury to the WR corps and it will be excuse heaven!!


I disagree with your assessment of the WR corp in regards to Bradford.......This is the best WR group he has ever had so if you call it excuse making look at every WR he played with and what those guys have done with other QBs.....it isn't pretty.

nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Apr 16 2016, 11:14 PM) *
I disagree with your assessment of the WR corp in regards to Bradford.......This is the best WR group he has ever had so if you call it excuse making look at every WR he played with and what those guys have done with other QBs.....it isn't pretty.



Aren't Givens and Randell known to have problems with drops also?

I remember a comment about them fitting "right in" with our guys.
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 16 2016, 07:20 PM) *
This WR corps is tailor made for excuses. It's sub par at best and will be there for the taking if justifications need to be found for a 7th season of sub par QB performance. Plug in the usual injury to the WR corps and it will be excuse heaven!!

------------REC... YDS.... AVG.. LNG.. TD
Agholor.... 23.... 283.... 12.3... 53... 1
Randle..... 188.. 2,644.. 14.1 ...72.... 20
Matthews. 152.. 1,869.. 12.3... 78.... 16
Givens .... 107.. 1,779.. 16.6... 65.... 5

Agholor was an injured rookie and remains a question with hope to be that #1. Randle is an underachiever who expected a much larger payday as FA ... a #3 on a one-year deal with hope to produce for that payday. Matthews is a #2 with the work ethic to be an average #1. Givens is a #4 speed receiver who should help the other receivers reach their hope.

Reality Fan
QUOTE (Zero @ Apr 17 2016, 07:40 AM) *
Agholor was an injured rookie and remains a question with hope to be that #1. Randle is an underachiever who expected a much larger payday as FA ... a #3 on a one-year deal with hope to produce for that payday. Matthews is a #2 with the work ethic to be an average #1. Givens is a #4 speed receiver who should help the other receivers reach their hope.


And for those keeping score at home....this is the BEST group of WRs Bradford has ever played with...lol
Joegrane
And add to them Ertz and Sproles who get respect from defenses plus Celek who continues to find ways to make plays.

Another difference will be the change on offensive scheme. On the plus side, Bradford will have at least some ability to make changes at the line.

He likely won't have "tempo" on his side. Chip has a reputation as a creative offensive mind. How much will the Eagles' O suffer from Chip's loss? I think it is only a question of how much, not if.

However, I expect the D to benefit from the more favorable time of possession due to the different offensive philosophy and the better OGs.

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Apr 17 2016, 09:42 AM) *
And for those keeping score at home....this is the BEST group of WRs Bradford has ever played with...lol
D Rock
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Apr 16 2016, 09:06 PM) *
You can't watch the tape and blame Bradford if you are objective.....the WRs were subpar because...well...they were subpar....

It is funny how some here say Cooper or Austin or Agohlar sucks and then say that Bradford was the reason in the next breath....at least this year he has Randle who has a demonstrated record of at least being decent...this will be the first year of his career that Bradford will have no excuse for not performing...a good O line and decent targets

Agreed.

My 3 worst are

Agohlar, Jordan Matthews, Wiznewski.
Joegrane
Why do you so dislike J Matthews, especially since you agree there is was not a lot of WR talent around him?

QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 17 2016, 05:29 PM) *
Agreed.

My 3 worst are

Agohlar, Jordan Matthews, Wiznewski.

D Rock
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Apr 17 2016, 11:50 PM) *
Why do you so dislike J Matthews, especially since you agree there is was not a lot of WR talent around him?

Because he couldn't catch a fucking cold. Led the league in drops. And on the rare occasion he actually DID haul in a pass, he celebrated like he just won the lottery. He sucks balls (and then drops em).

nephillymike
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 17 2016, 06:40 PM) *
Because he couldn't catch a fucking cold. Led the league in drops. And on the rare occasion he actually DID haul in a pass, he celebrated like he just won the lottery. He sucks balls (and then drops em).



Agree on celebrations, disagree on overall evaluation. I think he's above average for a 2nd year guy. I like his work ethic.

I imagine if you think that little of Matthews and Algohlar, you must really think our WR corps suck balls this year.

Joegrane
I hope last year was an aberration. Supposedly he had a hand injury for a while.

He was getting acclimated with Bradford. In the first half there were many passes that were catchable but not easy catches for the receivers. They were clearly not yet in sync.

Did he have a history of drops when in college? I don't remember hearing that about him.

He seems to be too smart and too hard of a worker to have that drop-rate continue. Furthermore with an improved group of WRs he won't be targeted so often.

It seems that Bradford fails to take some heat off of some of his passes, unlike Foles who probably does not have as strong an arm.

QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 17 2016, 07:40 PM) *
Because he couldn't catch a fucking cold. Led the league in drops. And on the rare occasion he actually DID haul in a pass, he celebrated like he just won the lottery. He sucks balls (and then drops em).

D Rock
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 18 2016, 01:02 AM) *
Agree on celebrations, disagree on overall evaluation. I think he's above average for a 2nd year guy. I like his work ethic.

It's not my evaluation. The drops are on tape. That's not analysis. That's just facts. The work ethic which makes for great reading during this time of year, is a mark against him considering how poorly he played. If he's working more than anyone to reach his laughable level of incompetence on the field, I'd hate to see how bad he'd look when that work tails off down the line.

D Rock
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Apr 18 2016, 01:24 AM) *
I hope last year was an aberration. Supposedly he had a hand injury for a while.

He was getting acclimated with Bradford. In the first half there were many passes that were catchable but not easy catches for the receivers. They were clearly not yet in sync.

Did he have a history of drops when in college? I don't remember hearing that about him.

He seems to be too smart and too hard of a worker to have that drop-rate continue. Furthermore with an improved group of WRs he won't be targeted so often.

It seems that Bradford fails to take some heat off of some of his passes, unlike Foles who probably does not have as strong an arm.

Yes. He wasn't considered "sure handed" coming out of Vandy.

So you defend a chronic pass dropper by blaming the quarterback and suggesting he get fewer targets as a solution? That's hilarious.

Ooops, sorry Jordan. Didn't mean to hit you in the hands.

Phits
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 17 2016, 07:40 PM) *
Because he couldn't catch a fucking cold.

Then again he was receiving passes from QB's that favor throwing the ball to the other team or leading his receivers into traffic for the big hits. That sure doesn't build confidence. Yet he still managed to have a 1000 (997) yard season.
QUOTE
Led the league in drops.

According to whose stats? According to the ones that matter he ranked #21 in the league behind "shitty" receivers like Evans (TB), Marshall (NYJ), Thomas (DEN), Edelman (NE), Jones (ATL)

Drops were a team wide problem last season, not a Jordan Matthews issue. With drops as wide spread as they were you have to look at the passer as well as the recipients....especially when the QB has an entire NFL history of being mediocre and underperforming.

QUOTE
It's easy to blame the wide receiver for dropped passes, but partial blame can sometimes fall on the quarterback. Consistently throwing into tight situations or slight accuracy issues can lead to a higher percentage of drops as well.

Stats

QUOTE
He sucks balls (and then drops em).

In that case he and Bradford are made for each other.
mcnabbulous
I'd say they're both pretty mediocre. Which is probably why there is so much confusion and debate on the topic.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 18 2016, 04:45 PM) *
I'd say they're both pretty mediocre. Which is probably why there is so much confusion and debate on the topic.


A pet peeve of mine.

People say mediocre all the time, when the nicest alternative description is below average or even bad.

Sorry. I just hear that word as a substitue for below average or unacceptable all too many times on talk radio and board discussion.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 18 2016, 06:56 PM) *
A pet peeve of mine.

People say mediocre all the time, when the nicest alternative description is below average or even bad.

Sorry. I just hear that word as a substitue for below average or unacceptable all too many times on talk radio and board discussion.

I'm using it as average. For what it's worth. That's about how I view both of them.
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.