babydemon90
Footballguy
I expect McDermott to get a HC gig this offseason - just which team. Great turnaround for the guy, after being fired here (obviously we were too quick on the hook on that one)
McDermott was fired after 2010 to make way for Castillo to take over the defense. Isn't that when Washburn was brought in with this "wide 9" scheme? That was the undoing of Andy Reid or at least the beginning of the end.McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.
Ive read things about Haley and his ego/pompous attitude. Do not want.Todd Haley had his problems in K.C and was kind of Chip Kelly light but he overcame some obstacles in Pitt and is now a fan favorite when even Big Ben didn't want him intially. Great passing game and Hall had an amazing year as a backup when everyone thought he was washed up. Don't see why we don't at least bring him in for an interview.
My only concern with McDermott is if his success in Carolina is based off of talent and not his coaching.I agree. That's a combination I'd be happy with. Was listening to a few players last night and they all seem to like Shermer. Not sure McDermott wouldn't have his own guy in mind for OC, but the prospect of McDermott/Shermer/Bradford being here next year is exciting.Yes!! Just wrapping up! Man I'd take him with Shermerbas OC and keep Bradford. This would be awesome. Just think about what Kurt Coleman was here and what he's done in Carolina.Sean McDermott would be a welcome addition in my opinion. He's on 975 the fanatic right now and, man he gets it. Interesting sidenote, since McDermitt became defensive Cordinator and Carolina five years ago they're the only team to finish in the top 10 defensively each year since.
Ah yes. Got my Andy guys mixed up. Sean was still the scapegoat for a subpar defensive year if I recall. Wasn't that Vick's crazy season but we lost at home to GB?McDermott was fired after 2010 to make way for Castillo to take over the defense. Isn't that when Washburn was brought in with this "wide 9" scheme? That was the undoing of Andy Reid or at least the beginning of the end.McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.
Im not sure ... he looked lost at the time. His time wasnt then, though it could be now.I expect McDermott to get a HC gig this offseason - just which team. Great turnaround for the guy, after being fired here (obviously we were too quick on the hook on that one)
He played a part in bringing in that talent.My only concern with McDermott is if his success in Carolina is based off of talent and not his coaching.I agree. That's a combination I'd be happy with. Was listening to a few players last night and they all seem to like Shermer. Not sure McDermott wouldn't have his own guy in mind for OC, but the prospect of McDermott/Shermer/Bradford being here next year is exciting.Yes!! Just wrapping up! Man I'd take him with Shermerbas OC and keep Bradford. This would be awesome. Just think about what Kurt Coleman was here and what he's done in Carolina.Sean McDermott would be a welcome addition in my opinion. He's on 975 the fanatic right now and, man he gets it. Interesting sidenote, since McDermitt became defensive Cordinator and Carolina five years ago they're the only team to finish in the top 10 defensively each year since.
I do think that there may have been a little bit of scapegoating. McDermott's defenses started out great here, then kind of went downhill. But that may or may not have been totally his fault in the end.Ah yes. Got my Andy guys mixed up. Sean was still the scapegoat for a subpar defensive year if I recall. Wasn't that Vick's crazy season but we lost at home to GB?McDermott was fired after 2010 to make way for Castillo to take over the defense. Isn't that when Washburn was brought in with this "wide 9" scheme? That was the undoing of Andy Reid or at least the beginning of the end.McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.
Kind of where I am as well, as I'd like to see a defensive minded guy in the fold overseeing the projected moved back to a 4-3 base. Let him bring in whoever he likes as DC to help obviously.McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.
I can't remember if it was in the old thread or some where on the board but I was reading about McDermott's player evaluation skills. He was saying how Josh Norman was considered a hot head that was trying too hard during the senior bowl which was driving his value way down. Sean saw something in practice though that caught his eye and he suggested to the staff they draft the kid, which they did in the 5th round.
He's a players coach and he has the requisite skills for the game. His personality is also one that I think finds a way to disarm who he talks to instead of trying to bully them. So I can see him being a good fit with the Front office also. I think he'd be my top candidate. Just can't finalize anything till they are out.
Your not wrong, the team wasn't that good and completely underperformed. That said, I like many offensive pieces we have here, and would like to see some resources used to upgrade the OLine and keep continuity. IMO Shurmur gives us the best chance to keep that continuity, and showed ability (albeit in 1 game) to slow the tempo a bit, audible, put the QB under center, play action, fake the quick throw to the TE and them handoff on a delay, etc. IMO the same offensive personnel in a WCO-type system could be a top-10 offense (provided the line is addressed). More than keeping Shurmur, I am hoping they keep Bradford and let him gel with the young WRs. Don't see another QB option unless we completely rebuild, and I don't think we need that.A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
Chronology was actually McDermott fired -> Washburn hired as D-Line coach -> Castillo promoted to DC.McDermott was fired after 2010 to make way for Castillo to take over the defense. Isn't that when Washburn was brought in with this "wide 9" scheme? That was the undoing of Andy Reid or at least the beginning of the end.McDermott was the scapegoat here for Andy's end of term madness. He let Washburn get away with murder on the defense and it cost Sean a real shot at doing something.
Eh, "due diligence" and "no stone unturned". I hope.Don't even understand the interest in marone
Eagles not interested, according to reports: http://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2016/1/5/10717714/eagles-coaching-search-doug-marrone-rumors-jaguars-bills-saintsWhy are people against Marrone? Personality? I'm not really holding anything against him for his tenure in Buffalo, record-wise.
From BGN:
When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:
"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
My perception was that the whole organization was kind of dysfunctional and that's why he wanted out. Really have no idea though, and I guess he is irrelevant anyway at this point.Eagles not interested, according to reports: http://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2016/1/5/10717714/eagles-coaching-search-doug-marrone-rumors-jaguars-bills-saintsWhy are people against Marrone? Personality? I'm not really holding anything against him for his tenure in Buffalo, record-wise.
IMO, personality, yes... but more his decision to opt out of his contract in Buffalo. Abandoned the team. Not a leader.
Wow, the league just put their foot in their mouth. In their effort to promote minority candidates, they just told a minority candidate that he isn't good enough and shouldn't be applying. Nice job.From BGN:
When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:
"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
Terrible personality who feuded with the GM and the media, stormed out of the room when they made the Watkins trade, mismanaged the O-Line (his supposed area of expertise) and the QB situation and ran a boring offense. The success of the team during his tenure was entirely due to the D, which he had nothing to do with.Why are people against Marrone? Personality? I'm not really holding anything against him for his tenure in Buffalo, record-wise.
eh not reallyWow, the league just put their foot in their mouth. In their effort to promote minority candidates, they just told a minority candidate that he isn't good enough and shouldn't be applying. Nice job.From BGN:
When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:
"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
Uh, Andy Reid down?eh not reallyWow, the league just put their foot in their mouth. In their effort to promote minority candidates, they just told a minority candidate that he isn't good enough and shouldn't be applying. Nice job.From BGN:
When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:
"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
how often does a position coach become a head coach without the coordinator step in between? does anyone think Duce has any chance of getting the job?
I didn;t say it NEVER happens, i questioned how oftenUh, Andy Reid down?eh not reallyWow, the league just put their foot in their mouth. In their effort to promote minority candidates, they just told a minority candidate that he isn't good enough and shouldn't be applying. Nice job.From BGN:
When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:
"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
how often does a position coach become a head coach without the coordinator step in between? does anyone think Duce has any chance of getting the job?
I think you're always trying to groom your future quarterback, but at his age, there's no reason Bradford couldn't be the quarterback for ten years. Barring injury, of course. People tend to forget how young Bradford is. They consider him older and Cousins young and they're only 9 months apart. That doesn't mean I don't want them grooming a young quarterback. We all know Bradford's injury history, but if we get play like we did from him the second half of the season and improve our o-line, I think we have a potential top ten guy.the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
I know. but it has happened 33% of the time under Lurie.I didn;t say it NEVER happens, i questioned how oftenUh, Andy Reid down?eh not reallyWow, the league just put their foot in their mouth. In their effort to promote minority candidates, they just told a minority candidate that he isn't good enough and shouldn't be applying. Nice job.From BGN:
When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:
"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
how often does a position coach become a head coach without the coordinator step in between? does anyone think Duce has any chance of getting the job?
do you think duce:
1) has any chance at this job
2) will get any other interviews for head coach
yeah, I am far from qualified to determine the chances of Bradford getting hurt again, but from my complete unprofessional, layman, opinion, I am concerned. it will be interesting to see how Bradford does with a year of the system under his belt, but I get worried if they tie up a lot of money in him, being that they already have money tied up in a few places and will need to make more room with some good young guys coming up (depending how Mathews and Agholar can look, coming in as early picks may command a high number)I think you're always trying to groom your future quarterback, but at his age, there's no reason Bradford couldn't be the quarterback for ten years. Barring injury, of course. People tend to forget how young Bradford is. They consider him older and Cousins young and they're only 9 months apart. That doesn't mean I don't want them grooming a young quarterback. We all know Bradford's injury history, but if we get play like we did from him the second half of the season and improve our o-line, I think we have a potential top ten guy.the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
Which is why the rule is stupid. Duce could have been the best candidate for the job in Lurie's mind but due to the color of his skin, he's labeled as the Rooney Rule guy. Just let them interview who they want. If they hire a terrible white coach and their rival hires the better black coach then their loss.Are the owners so afraid of their own deep seeded racist tendencies that they don't think they can hire a black coach fairly?From BGN:
When the Philadelphia Eagles interviewed running back coach Duce Staley over the weekend, many were quick to point out how the interview satisfied the Rooney Rule requirement. According to NFL insider Jason Cole, the league took notice and is concerned with Philadelphia's decision:
"As the Philadelphia Eagles go through their coaching search, one of the concerns that came up over the weekend was the disappointment by the NFL over the interview of Duce Staley. The league felt that, in interviewing Staley, the running back coach for the Eagles, that this was a way for the Eagles to manipulate the Rooney Rule and get around the rule quickly so they could hire whoever they want to right away and not give a legitimate interview to a minority candidate.
The league office was especially disappointed because of the interview of Staley because of the support the Eagles got in the aftermath of the Riley Cooper incident from two years ago. So all of that put together put the Eagles in a bad light.
However, what the Eagles explained to the league office, and to other that were concerned with this, is that Staley, in fact, requested this interview, said that he was one of the best candidates, and they felt obliged to give one of their own assistants, one of their own people, a chance to interview for that job.
This is one of the continuing problems that comes up with team as they deal with the Rooney Rule."
More likely afraid of media overreacction and politically motivated accusations if they only interview people of one race, regardless of ability.Are the owners so afraid of their own deep seeded racist tendencies that they don't think they can hire a black coach fairly?
Mo, keep in mind that Bradford isn't as old as many think he is. He is only 28 and could still have a lot of good football in front of him (assuming his health holds up better than it has in past seasons). Typically speaking, he is the kind of passer that can play longer in the league due to his accuracy and ability in the pocket, with just enough mobility to buy some time when needed (usually within the pocket, not rushing). If he can continue to grasp an offense, read a defense, and make accurate throws he can extend his career like Brees and Palmer have (both 8 years older than him). I'm not saying he is as good as them, but there are years ahead of him for playing if he wants it.the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
I think Carson Palmer is the perfect example.Mo, keep in mind that Bradford isn't as old as many think he is. He is only 28 and could still have a lot of good football in front of him (assuming his health holds up better than it has in past seasons). Typically speaking, he is the kind of passer that can play longer in the league due to his accuracy and ability in the pocket, with just enough mobility to buy some time when needed (usually within the pocket, not rushing). If he can continue to grasp an offense, read a defense, and make accurate throws he can extend his career like Brees and Palmer have (both 8 years older than him). I'm not saying he is as good as them, but there are years ahead of him for playing if he wants it.the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
Remember that when he was drafted he was very highly touted. People at the time said he had one of the greatest pre-draft workouts for scouts to date. (I think that had something to do with crazy accuracy that day.) He also has been shuffled between offensive systems so many times that it's hard to judge him and his ability to develop/be groomed as you suggested. I don't know what price I'd be willing to pay to keep him, though. And that means the financial cost as well as the cost of shoehorning a coaching staff in around him as your QB of the future. Just some food for thought.
any concerns about the rumors of him wanting to retire before Chip signed him? I think we can probably attribute that to the huge frustrations of his injuries and probably not being appreciated in St. Louis, but it would be something I would want to further explore if I was considering him for the next 3-5 years.I think Carson Palmer is the perfect example.Mo, keep in mind that Bradford isn't as old as many think he is. He is only 28 and could still have a lot of good football in front of him (assuming his health holds up better than it has in past seasons). Typically speaking, he is the kind of passer that can play longer in the league due to his accuracy and ability in the pocket, with just enough mobility to buy some time when needed (usually within the pocket, not rushing). If he can continue to grasp an offense, read a defense, and make accurate throws he can extend his career like Brees and Palmer have (both 8 years older than him). I'm not saying he is as good as them, but there are years ahead of him for playing if he wants it.the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
Remember that when he was drafted he was very highly touted. People at the time said he had one of the greatest pre-draft workouts for scouts to date. (I think that had something to do with crazy accuracy that day.) He also has been shuffled between offensive systems so many times that it's hard to judge him and his ability to develop/be groomed as you suggested. I don't know what price I'd be willing to pay to keep him, though. And that means the financial cost as well as the cost of shoehorning a coaching staff in around him as your QB of the future. Just some food for thought.
Oddly no. Not sure why most of the staff hasn't been let go yet.Has Billy Davis been fired yet?
New coach will want to interview themOddly no. Not sure why most of the staff hasn't been let go yet.Has Billy Davis been fired yet?
I don't disagree with the notion that Bradford could be top ten. I was highly impressed with his play and his leadership this season. But that was in chips offense. He has not impressed in other offenses and may or may not be successful in the next. I think it is a potentially franchise ruining mistake to hire the next coach with the offensive coordinator and qb already in place, or to even let that influence your decision on who the best candidate is. Forget Everyone on the team, find the best coach and let him decide his OC and QB.JuniorNB said:I think you're always trying to groom your future quarterback, but at his age, there's no reason Bradford couldn't be the quarterback for ten years. Barring injury, of course. People tend to forget how young Bradford is. They consider him older and Cousins young and they're only 9 months apart. That doesn't mean I don't want them grooming a young quarterback. We all know Bradford's injury history, but if we get play like we did from him the second half of the season and improve our o-line, I think we have a potential top ten guy.modogg said:the new coach has a lot on his plate, but they need to bring in somebody who can groom and develop a QB. I know we have our share of Bradford fans in here, but I worry if he is the Eagles plan for the next 3-5 years. I think they need to find a future QB and have someone in place who can really develop that talent.oldmanhawkins said:A lot of talk going around about how Philadelphia needs to try to find a coach that can work with Demarco because he's signed long term. Or they need to get a defensive guy who would be happy to work with Shurmur and then we can try to lock Bradford up. Some have even suggested just giving Shurmur the job. To me that sounds like we are assuming all these coaches are pretty much the same and our best chance at success it just getting the guy that can adapt best to the team we currently have in place. The team that just completely underperformed this season. I was a Chip supporter (though there were things I didn't like) so maybe I'm biased, but I just don't think this team is that good. If anything, I think this scheme made most of them look better than they really are.
makes you wonder about guys like Romo and Brady who were drafted so late or not drafted at all. How much of it is talent coming in, and how much of it is taking the talent and developing it to the NFL game. I am sure there are plenty of examples of how this worked and how it didn't. I think there are some QBs who fail in the NFL after being a 1st round pick for lack of talent, but I think quite a few fail or do not get a good chance because of the drafting team
But other than that, Mrs. Lincoln . . .Pip said:Terrible personality who feuded with the GM and the media, stormed out of the room when they made the Watkins trade, mismanaged the O-Line (his supposed area of expertise) and the QB situation and ran a boring offense. The success of the team during his tenure was entirely due to the D, which he had nothing to do with.Long Ball Larry said:Why are people against Marrone? Personality? I'm not really holding anything against him for his tenure in Buffalo, record-wise.
You'll just never sell this to existing players. Too short of a season, and too many quick turnarounds happen. Going from 7-9 to a contender can and has happened in a year.so i know the NFL wouldn't allow this, and it not something done in the NFL as of yet, but let's suppose Bradford doesn't want to sign and he leaves the Eagles (my guess is they franchise him if they have to). But if he does leave, we can all agree they really have pretty crappy options. I have revisited my idea of grabbing a QB if the value isn't there, and am wondering what would happen if the Eagles chose to "tank".
i don't think they would be allowed to, and it isn't as easy as it can be in the NBA, but i think this would be the best option for them. however, if they were to put themselves in a position to get a top 3 pick, it would seem to set them up real nice with the ability to grab a top young QB next year (i would have to think there would be at least one QB that can be viewed as an NFL QB). I'm sure this would be looked at pretty harshly, and would be a tough sell to the veteran players, especially those with maybe only a few years left, but as a 1 year plan would this not be the most feasible option?
P.S. I think i already miss football, even without absolutely atrocious this year was for the Eagles :(