- 3,176
- 1,332
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2007
Kessler actually has a better completion %, better passer rating, and the same TD/INT ratio as Wentz
LOL.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Kessler actually has a better completion %, better passer rating, and the same TD/INT ratio as Wentz
The fact you keep using other picks and saying we only owed them one pick in 2018, nothing else, etc etc.
Was it not 1st, 3rd, 4th, in 2016
1st in 2017
2nd in 2018
That's the deal, yes or no?
That sounds like a rg3 type boat load deal in the 2012 draft....The fact you keep using other picks and saying we only owed them one pick in 2018, nothing else, etc etc.
Was it not 1st, 3rd, 4th, in 2016
1st in 2017
2nd in 2018
That's the deal, yes or no?
What post did you read that says that Cody Kessler would be a better pick? Are you lost, confused, what're we doin here?
Philly gave up a bunch of stuff to get Wentz, a bunch. Cleveland, accepted all those picks, made even more, took a much lower rated QB and is getting similar production. (with extra picks to boot)
You read this as, the Eagles should have taken Kessler? Is that how you're interpreting the message?
Logical reasoning makes it clear to see that you think guys like Dak and Kessler would've been better picks when factoring in the cost to get him no ?
Hot Takes saying that this or that guy would've been a better pick is dumb as hell ..especially since I see you in the Laker thread going at dudes necks who say that Dlo or Ingram are bad picks
We are TEN games into the season
The fact you keep using other picks and saying we only owed them one pick in 2018, nothing else, etc etc.
Was it not 1st, 3rd, 4th, in 2016
1st in 2017
2nd in 2018
That's the deal, yes or no?
but who gives a ****? in the end they gave up ONE draft pick but that goes against your argument so it's "meaningless"
ummmmmm.. I never actually said "nothing else".. you used the word "another" I was seeking to clarify that, unless we have different definitions of the word..The fact you keep using other picks and saying we only owed them one pick in 2018, nothing else, etc etc.
[thread="651382"]Based on the season 10 games in, Wentz probably goes #1 in a redraft does he not?[/thread]
every team is allotted 7 draft picks, per draft
the eagles traded 5 picks to the browns for 2 picks in return
the eagles will receive 2 drafts picks from the Vikings for bradford
the team selected 8 players last draft (3 of the picks given up were from that draft).. and have 8 picks currently for the next draft (1 of the picks go to the browns)
No way an RB or DE is going #1 with two legitimate QB prospects on the board, it's going to be a QB. So it's between Dak and Wentz.Do Elliott and Dak die before this redraft? Bosa?
Question for you guys who believe the "Eagles gave all that up when they could have took Dak late....etc" narrative: Do you truly believe that Dak would be putting up similar numbers in Philly compared to what he's doing in Dallas? Be honest.
No way an RB or DE is going #1 with two legitimate QB prospects on the board, it's going to be a QB. So it's between Dak and Wentz.Do Elliott and Dak die before this redraft? Bosa?
Many GMs will make the argument that we only know Dak has thrived behind this line and with the tools around him.
Everything else we knew prior to the draft being taken into consideration (measurables, future projections etc.) , it's still likely Wentz goes #1.
You really see a RB or DE going #1 in 2016 when there's a good chance there are two franchise QBs on the board?Only QB's are allowed to go #1?
"many GM's"You know some of the GM's that still have jobs in the NFL, right?
The fact you keep using other picks and saying we only owed them one pick in 2018, nothing else, etc etc.
Was it not 1st, 3rd, 4th, in 2016
1st in 2017
2nd in 2018
That's the deal, yes or no?
but who gives a ****? in the end they gave up ONE draft pick but that goes against your argument so it's "meaningless"
No, logical reasoning is they should have (in theory) taken the second best player in college football, with the 2nd pick. (that would have become best player, since the Rams took Goff)
That's logical reasoning.
I said not to trade multiple picks (over multiple drafts) to take a player that wasn't the clear cut 2nd best player in the draft. I've said that 152 times now. Do you still need clarification or we good?
This is the classic gambler's rationalization, "I was playing with house money so it doesn't matter." Well, technically at one point you had all the that money and could've walked away.
I will post my thanksgiving food power rankings tomorrowcan someone @ me when we start talking about thanksgiving again
I will post my thanksgiving food power rankings tomorrow
please explain how this analogy works to the NFL draft where you have to use the draft picks in some manner..This is the classic gambler's rationalization, "I was playing with house money so it doesn't matter that I lost it." Well, technically at one point you had all that money and could've walked away.
So you're basically saying that if the Eagles took Dak in the 4th, an o-linemen, and a couple receivers in the earlier rounds, that he would be lighting it up like he's doing in Dallas, right?I don't know, honestly. Would you use your first, second, and third round picks to bolster the offense around Dak? If so, then why couldn't he? The coaching staff is doing great work with Wentz, could they not do great work with Dak, but with more weapons/Oline on the team?Question for you guys who believe the "Eagles gave all that up when they could have took Dak late....etc" narrative: Do you truly believe that Dak would be putting up similar numbers in Philly compared to what he's doing in Dallas? Be honest.