For sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by QB_Eagles
Printable View
For sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by QB_Eagles
Trey Lance second Pro Day is April 19.
Eagles need 5 QBs taking in top 10:clap:
5 QB’s and Pitts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe1016
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why? You don't think they'd love to take Pitts if he was there for them? Or do you think not being tempted to is part of why they traded down...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.B
Chances are good 5 QBs, Pitts, and 1-2 WR/CB/OT are gone ahead of them at 12...so they'd have the choice of the #2-#3 WR/CB/OT and any DE/LB they want at 12.
I really wonder who the Eagles are targeting. It's probably OL or DL but I can see Waddle be available at 12 as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe1016
No, you don't, but it certainly helps. Not necessarily being a dual threat QB, but at least having mobility and being able to extend plays. Which he hasn't shown.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.B
That's the mold of the top, modern-day NFL QB, and he doesn't fit it. So calling him the most league-ready seems pretty silly. So does bringing up arguably the greatest quarterback of all time, who also happens to have been drafted two decades ago, as well as being an obvious outlier in today's league.
Would you say Matt Ryan fits that mold? He won MVP with Shanahan's offense. If the 49ers draft Mac Jones, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that they know what they're doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrei00
It's not like they have a good track record of making smart QB investment decisions and there are rumors that Lynch and Shanahan aren't on the same page regarding the pick, which would be an odd situation to be in, consdering what they gave up to move. But other than that, sure, who am I to argue against whatever might decide.Quote:
Originally Posted by QB_Eagles
Also no, I don't think Ryan necessarily fits that mold, though I do believe him to be a little more mobile than Jones. But he's not a current prospect coming into the league, he's a veteran. I'd argue there is a difference there.
What track record of QB investment decision? They made the Super Bowl with Garoppolo in 2019. Last year half their team was on IR.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrei00
So is he a high quality starting QB? Leave alone Shanahan's ability to coach and scheme around a QB for a second, is the decision to trade a 2nd round pick and pay him, I believe at the time, a record-breaking contract a smart one?Quote:
Originally Posted by QB_Eagles
They also brought in Hoyer, drafted Beathard, while passing on the likes of Mahomes, Watson, or Jackson in the process.
Yes, they made a SB trip that was largely due to having a dominant defense more than QB play, but that team could have already won one by now and be set very well long term if they would've been smarter at picking their QB(s).
Moving down from 6 to 12 ahead of the draft makes me think they aren’t necessarily “targeting” anyone in particular. Obviously they have their rankings but if one guy really stood out above the rest not sure they move back.Quote:
Originally Posted by QB_Eagles
Pitts being drafted in the top 10 would be saving the Eagles from themselves. Same for the Cowboys.Quote:
Originally Posted by SiteWolf
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You can have average athleticism and still have elite pocket presence. Look at Tony Romo. He was a master in the pocket and his ability to escape the rush was amazing and I would exactly call him a superior athlete. Hell his 40 time was probably in the high 6’s. Mac Jones is not a statue. He has enough pocket presence (which I would expect would improve) to be successful in the NFL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrei00
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That’s more than likely true. They have needs all over so it would smart for them to just take the best player available regardless of position.Quote:
Originally Posted by hugepatsfan
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk