Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The Carson Wentz Poll
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
mcnabbulous
Speak now or forever hold your peace.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 26 2016, 10:09 PM) *
Speak now or forever hold your peace.

You are evil....lol
nephillymike
I think he'll be good.

I think Zero's board name is safe as always.

What does this poll have to do with the Rams drafting Wentz?? devil03.gif

You know that's the anvil waiting on the other end of the tunnel right?
mcnabbulous
Fwiw, I picked very good and one championship.

I am feeling pretty good about the pick. It's risky, but I think his floor is pretty high. He's big, strong and athletic. Even if he struggles in some capacity, he has enough tools to make plays.

Hell the more I talk about him, the more I'm feeling a dynasty a brewin'. At the very least, it's exciting to have a young QB with legit upside in the mix. I can remember how exciting it was when Donnie started to get serious reps. Man, that feels like forever ago and yesterday at the same time.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 26 2016, 10:40 PM) *
Fwiw, I picked very good and one championship.

I am feeling pretty good about the pick. It's risky, but I think his floor is pretty high. He's big, strong and athletic. Even if he struggles in some capacity, he has enough tools to make plays.

Hell the more I talk about him, the more I'm feeling a dynasty a brewin'. At the very least, it's exciting to have a young QB with legit upside in the mix. I can remember how exciting it was when Donnie started to get serious reps. Man, that feels like forever ago and yesterday at the same time.



Dude, you do know that we're getting Goff right?

McNair
Young

Big strong mobile QB's.

Had success with the 1-AA route.

It's Jeff Fisher's style preference.

It's our fate.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 26 2016, 11:06 PM) *
Dude, you do know that we're getting Goff right?

McNair
Young

Big strong mobile QB's.

Had success with the 1-AA route.

It's Jeff Fisher's style preference.

It's our fate.

Can't tell if serious
Dreagon
I think he can be very good if he is brought in right and allowed to develop. If your coach takes a page from Parcell's book and be patient, and don't succumb to the temptation to throw him out there too early just because the fans are clamoring for it, I think the kid has a future.

But the flip side of that is he can also be wrecked if handled wrong. It's better to keep Bradford or Daniels out there for a couple of years, while you build a team the kid can grow into. And for Pete's sake, treat him like the investment he is and build a top flight offensive line to be waiting for him to start out behind during that time.
Zero
I agree with Dreagon. I also voted for elite with multiple SBs. I have to be Optimystic.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 26 2016, 11:11 PM) *
Can't tell if serious



Semi serious.

The woe is us part of me tells me it will happen that way.

I put Wentz as a 55% chance of being there for us, way lower than most.
Eyrie
I voted very good (at this time of year I always have unrealistic hope for the future) and no SuperBowls (I'm never that unrealistically hopeful!)


QUOTE (Dreagon @ Apr 27 2016, 08:28 AM) *
I think he can be very good if he is brought in right and allowed to develop. If your coach takes a page from Parcell's book and be patient, and don't succumb to the temptation to throw him out there too early just because the fans are clamoring for it, I think the kid has a future.

But the flip side of that is he can also be wrecked if handled wrong. It's better to keep Bradford or Daniels out there for a couple of years, while you build a team the kid can grow into. And for Pete's sake, treat him like the investment he is and build a top flight offensive line to be waiting for him to start out behind during that time.

Don't upset Mcnabbulous by suggesting that the OL needs valuable resources spent on it! biggrin.gif
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Apr 27 2016, 05:20 AM) *
Don't upset Mcnabbulous by suggesting that the OL needs valuable resources spent on it! biggrin.gif

If anyone should know that you should spend high draft picks on skill position players and pickup OL along the way, it's Cowboy fans.

Mark Tuinei - Undrafted
Nate Newton - Undrafted
Mark Stepnoski - 3rd Round
Kevin Gogan - 8th Round
Erik Williams - 3rd Round

Do I need to remind you how Aikman, Smith, and Irvin were acquired?

HobbEs
He will be elite...but the Rams will draft him.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HobbEs @ Apr 27 2016, 08:18 AM) *
He will be elite...but the Rams will draft him.

There's a lot of this going around, but all indication suggest there is less than 1% chance of that happening.
Eyrie
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 27 2016, 01:36 PM) *
If anyone should know that you should spend high draft picks on skill position players and pickup OL along the way, it's Cowboy fans.

Mark Tuinei - Undrafted
Nate Newton - Undrafted
Mark Stepnoski - 3rd Round
Kevin Gogan - 8th Round
Erik Williams - 3rd Round

Do I need to remind you how Aikman, Smith, and Irvin were acquired?

And Chuck Bednarik was #1 overall, Jerry Sisemore #3 overall, Tra Thomas #11, Jerome Mayberry #25.

That doesn't mean that we always use our #1 pick on the OL any more than your example means we should always take a RB in round one and never draft OL before round 3, but it does show that there is more than one way to build a team.

Ts are worth taking in the first round but Gs or Cs need to be extra special, and even then I'd be looking later in the round.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 27 2016, 01:36 PM) *
If anyone should know that you should spend high draft picks on skill position players and pickup OL along the way, it's Cowboy fans.

Mark Tuinei - Undrafted
Nate Newton - Undrafted
Mark Stepnoski - 3rd Round
Kevin Gogan - 8th Round
Erik Williams - 3rd Round

Do I need to remind you how Aikman, Smith, and Irvin were acquired?

Ancient history. Their current O line, considered by most to be one of the finest, is built on largely blue chippers.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Apr 27 2016, 10:15 AM) *
And Chuck Bednarik was #1 overall, Jerry Sisemore #3 overall, Tra Thomas #11, Jerome Mayberry #25.

That doesn't mean that we always use our #1 pick on the OL any more than your example means we should always take a RB in round one and never draft OL before round 3, but it does show that there is more than one way to build a team.

Ts are worth taking in the first round but Gs or Cs need to be extra special, and even then I'd be looking later in the round.

Yeah I mean I hear you. I'm not opposed to taking first round tackles (although I would limit that to LT and almost never in the top-10).

Anything else is worth looking elsewhere.

There are lots of ways to build teams. Drafting OL early just usually doesn't move the needle.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Apr 27 2016, 10:57 AM) *
Ancient history. Their current O line, considered by most to be one of the finest, is built on largely blue chippers.

And they have such impressive success to show for it!
Dreagon
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 27 2016, 10:59 AM) *
And they have such impressive success to show for it!


I didn't mean to make this about our line. What I'm saying is that you guys have put a real investment in Wentz, so treat him like it. Don't pull a Redskins and introduce him to the NFL behind a less than good line. That's a good way to ruin your investment.
Eyrie
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Apr 27 2016, 06:39 PM) *
I didn't mean to make this about our line. What I'm saying is that you guys have put a real investment in Wentz, so treat him like it. Don't pull a Redskins and introduce him to the NFL behind a less than good line. That's a good way to ruin your investment.

But your OLs (current and historic) are relevant to the main point.

Most high draft picks are joining a bad team, which is precisely why that team is picking high in the first place. Putting a rookie QB behind a bad OL will hinder his development at best and more likely set him back. Wentz is fortunate that we have a decent OL in place for 2016 (we should get another year from Peters and I expect Kelce to return to form), so if he does need to play then he'll have time to see what is happening rather than running for his life. The loss of next year's #1 is a problem as Peters may not see 2017 with us but if we can get his replacement either in round three this year or round two next year, then that only leaves finding a solution to LG for when Wentz takes over.
mcnabbulous
But you are presupposing that having a bad team is indicative of having a bad OL. Unless you can point me to some correlating data, I simply don't believe it.

The Cowboys have, according to many, the best OL in football. They went 4-12. The Browns have been regarded as having one of the best lines in football in the past 5+ years (including the best LT in the game). They are perennial losers.

My point is, and has been, that you don't need a great OL to be a great football team. You just need to have a cohesive unit. And you can build that without giving up valuable, high draft picks.

We aren't going to be drafting a LT. Johnson will be taking that position, based on how he was paid. That means we need a RT and possibly a LG -- as I'm more than comfortable with Wisniewski manning that role).
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.