Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: It's good to know we're completely squared away on defense!
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
The Franchise
Wow, for a second there I was hoping we'd beef up our LB corps or defensive line. Maybe even our secondary.

But apparently, we're all good on that side of the ball. Great to know!

Text conversations between Schwartz and Howie:

JS: WTF?!? I'm a good defensive coach, but not a fucking magician. Can you get me some help?

HR: Don't worry, we'll get you a defensive guy in the 6th (unless there's a stud OL from Youngstown State still available).

JS: Can you just admit that you're obsessed with proving yourself better than Chip like an 8 year old child, and do what's good for the Eagles and not for your Goodyear-blimp sized ego?

HR: That's cool, now you can wait until our 7th round pick. TTYL.
mcnabbulous
Our front 7 is widely considered one of the strengths of the team. Wtf are you talking about?
Reality Fan
I am surprised....there is no depth at LB....none...maybe they think they will find some in the late rounds....

But that is what happens when you trade away picks for one guy....you have to sacrifice something...
mcnabbulous
We essentially have one fewer pick (a fourth) than we would have had without the Wentz trade.

Schwartz got three former Bills defenders whom he previously coached in free agency. He's fine.

Edit: I guess a third too.
The Franchise
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 30 2016, 02:27 PM) *
Our front 7 is widely considered one of the strengths of the team. Wtf are you talking about?


Yes, it was certainly one of the stronger points of our 7-9 effort. You are aware that we have a new DC, who is going back to a 4-3, correct? Which requires more natural linemen? So while our front 7 was good, several of them will likely not fit well in his scheme, especially running a wide-9 technique. At this point, I think you're working for Dave Spadaro.
BirdsWinBaby
QUOTE (The Franchise @ Apr 30 2016, 03:52 PM) *
Yes, it was certainly one of the stronger points of our 7-9 effort. You are aware that we have a new DC, who is going back to a 4-3, correct? Which requires more natural linemen? So while our front 7 was good, several of them will likely not fit well in his scheme, especially running a wide-9 technique. At this point, I think you're working for Dave Spadaro.


not sure how well the front 7 will adapt to their new scheme...but Schwartz bristles anytime the media try to label him as an exclusively 'wide-9' DC. he likes to use it but has stated that he always mixes up his techniques to suit his players.

hopefully if our personnel (I.E: LBs) cant be effective in a wide-9, we wont see it much
The Franchise
QUOTE (BirdsWinBaby @ Apr 30 2016, 03:12 PM) *
not sure how well the front 7 will adapt to their new scheme...but Schwartz bristles anytime the media try to label him as an exclusively 'wide-9' DC. he likes to use it but has stated that he always mixes up his techniques to suit his players.

hopefully if our personnel (I.E: LBs) cant be effective in a wide-9, we wont see it much


I'm not a fan of the 'wide-9' for obvious reasons as a whole, but if it's used in certain situations that call for it then there's no problem. Schwartz's track record is proven, so I'm more concerned with getting him the personnel he needs.
Eyrie
QUOTE (The Franchise @ Apr 30 2016, 09:14 PM) *
I'm not a fan of the 'wide-9' for obvious reasons as a whole, but if it's used in certain situations that call for it then there's no problem. Schwartz's track record is proven, so I'm more concerned with getting him the personnel he needs.

And right now he has decent starting personnel at LB and absolutely no back up personnel.

Very strange.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Apr 30 2016, 05:16 PM) *
And right now he has decent starting personnel at LB and absolutely no back up personnel.

Very strange.

So what is your alternative. Had we not drafted these OL, everyone's panties would be in a twist.

I would expect us to bring in some backup options that get released for LB, but as mentioned before, Schwartz got a handful of FA signings and that will likely be the case through next season as we supplement the traded picks with strategic FA signings.
Eyrie
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 30 2016, 11:26 PM) *
So what is your alternative. Had we not drafted these OL, everyone's panties would be in a twist.

I would expect us to bring in some backup options that get released for LB, but as mentioned before, Schwartz got a handful of FA signings and that will likely be the case through next season as we supplement the traded picks with strategic FA signings.

Given our other needs I'd have thought long and hard before taking Haivai. I'd also have taken only one DB.

I suggested veterans on a one year deal for depth at LB the other day, so let's hope that there's at least one in the Eagles' plans to go with a couple of undrafted rookies.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Apr 30 2016, 05:29 PM) *
Given our other needs I'd have thought long and hard before taking Haivai. I'd also have taken only one DB.

I suggested veterans on a one year deal for depth at LB the other day, so let's hope that there's at least one in the Eagles' plans to go with a couple of undrafted rookies.

Would you rather us draft for your perceived needs or take players we think may be able to make an impact.

I can't believe we're sitting here on opposite sides of the "draft OL" argument, but then again, we took guys exactly in the areas where it makes sense.
Eyrie
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 30 2016, 11:38 PM) *
Would you rather us draft for your perceived needs or take players we think may be able to make an impact.

I can't believe we're sitting here on opposite sides of the "draft OL" argument, but then again, we took guys exactly in the areas where it makes sense.

A LB has finally been taken whislt we've been discussing the matter.

Of course we should always take the guys that can make an impact, but lower in the draft there is far less between players and so addressing a need makes sense, particularly with late round picks that rarely work out anyway.

I'd be delighted if Haivai turns into our future RT, but did we really need both Countess and Mills? From what I've read so far, Countess could well have been a UDFA.
mcnabbulous
No idea about the particular players, but I assume they have more information that we do.

I just don't think it's worth getting worked up over these later round guys. Just wait and see. People are negative for the sake of being negative.

All this draft will be judged on is whether Wentz works out. If he does, the rest of this stuff really won't matter.
Joegrane
Having a Pro Bowl DT on the same side as the 9-technique DE will probably be very important for making them less vulnerable to the outside run.

QUOTE (The Franchise @ Apr 30 2016, 04:14 PM) *
I'm not a fan of the 'wide-9' for obvious reasons as a whole, but if it's used in certain situations that call for it then there's no problem. Schwartz's track record is proven, so I'm more concerned with getting him the personnel he needs.

Joegrane
I previously expected them to draft a DT but when they recently signed a DT free agent, I assumed they did not see anyone they liked at their draft spots.

I suppose we'll see more of that next year with the limited draft picks.

QUOTE (The Franchise @ Apr 30 2016, 03:23 PM) *
Wow, for a second there I was hoping we'd beef up our LB corps or defensive line. Maybe even our secondary.

But apparently, we're all good on that side of the ball. Great to know!
...

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.