Q & A

Posted: March 31st, 2011 | Author: | Filed under: Philadelphia Eagles | Tags: , | 13 Comments »
Q at the ready

Quintin Mikell is stuck in the CBA wilderness. What's his future?


There was a good discussion here yesterday about Quintin Mikell based on this Philly Sports Daily article (very good read).  Q wants to stay an Eagle, but money becomes the big issue.  Q isn’t a guy that has had big contracts in the past.  He came in as a UDFA and then got a second deal, but it wasn’t big starter money.  Q isn’t a broke bum like most of us, but he’s not necessarily set for life.  The contract he’s about to sign is really important for his future.

The Eagles I’m sure would love to keep him for a couple of years at a reasonable salary.  I don’t know if that is possible.  There is a lack of good Safeties in the NFL right now.  The Jaguars are at every Pro Day where a Safety is working out.  They’re desperate and they’re not alone.  If one of these teams is close to being a contender they might overpay for Q’s services with a 3 or 4 year deal at a good rate.  If Q gets that offer, he has to take it.  Sam will have a better idea of numbers than me, but Q would be crazy to turn down a signing bonus of a few million dollars.  The Eagles just aren’t going to offer him that kind of money.

Now, if the other 31 teams decide that Q isn’t worth breaking the bank for, maybe the Eagles have a shot.  He does like it here.  He likes the team and organization.  Q genuinely wants to stay.  It would be great if they could work something out, but I’m not holding my breath.

* Someone asked who I would project as the starting DTs as of now.  I tend to think Bunk and Patt will get the first look because of seniority.  I really do believe it will be somewhat of an open tryout to find the best pairing.  And I’m as curious as anyone as to who will play which role.  Bunk and Patt each have the strength to play NT.  Each guy was a disruptive penetrator in college when given a chance in that role.  Laws could be a terrific UT.  I think Dixon is more of a NT, but he’s deceptively quick off the ball.  Washburn has a lot of options.

* Someone brought up a MTC post where Sheil Kapadia talked about how good Asante and Joselio’s coverage numbers were last year.  I want to talk about that in a separate post.  That’s more of a lengthy topic to get into.

* Should the Eagles move up for CB Prince Amukamara?  Tough question.  I need to write something out comparing and contrasting the top few CB prospects.  Prince is a very good prospect and I’d love the Eagles to get him, but is he worth moving up for?  That’s the key issue.  I think the bizarre offseason means we need to be careful about trading picks to move up.  I’d go up a few spots, but not from 23 to 10 or something like that.

* Will the wide nine system waste Trent Cole‘s ability as a run defender?  No, but it won’t take full advantage of it either.  Trent has developed into an outstanding run defender.  He makes plays when the ball comes at him or goes the other way.  He does this with leverage, instincts, and a great motor.  Flying up the field after the QB will get him out of position to be as impactful, but Trent still has the instincts and motor to find the ball and get in pursuit quickly.  Real good question.

* Trading Kolb for other players?  What about Chris Gamble?  I think the Eagles would be willing to deal Kolb for the right player.  It would have to be a Pro Bowl type player, though.  If the Vikings offered Chad Greenway (currently a franchise tag recipient) for Kolb, that would be pretty tempting.  We’d likely also get a mid-round pick in the 2012 draft.  I’m sure the Eagles have a few players around the league they’d be willing to discuss.  It wouldn’t be many.  There is no way Chris Gamble would be one.  Solid player, but not someone you trade a QB for, unless a high pick in 2012 comes along with him.

* How much input do positional coaches have in the draft?  It depends on the team.  Bengals coaches have a lot since they have the smallest scouting department in the league.  Those coaches go to Pro Days and workouts all offseason.  Eagles assistants only go to select workouts.  Scouts do the rest.

Assistant coaches get with the scouting department to let them know what kind of players they are looking for.  The scouts go find those players and bring back lists/info/video for the coaches to watch.  The coaches then have input as to who they like and who they don’t.  The overall draft board is shaped by a combination of what the scouts and coaches think.  There is a real group effort to doing a good job of scouting and drafting.  The scouts need to know what to look for and the assistants have to trust the scouts who have studied the players for 6 to 9 months.  It is detrimental to a team when an assistant sees a guy having a great or terrible Senior Bowl and then lets that be his opinion.  Game tape is the real key.  If the coaches and scouts don’t agree on prospects, more study is done.

You can bet Mudd and Washburn spent a day or two meeting with the personnel guys to explain what kind of players they are looking for.

* NT size. Is it better for the NT to be big in the new system?  Not necessarily.  We’re not looking for the DT to eat up blocks.  We want him to get behind the blockers.  Small guys can use pad level and a quick burst to get by and under blockers and be disruptive.  Big guys can overpower blocks.  The trick is to find someone that plays to his size/skill set.  Don’t get a big DT who thinks he’s Dwight Freeney.  Don’t get a small guy who thinks he’s Haloti Ngata.

13 Comments on “Q & A”

  1. 1 mcud said at 4:51 PM on March 31st, 2011:

    We’re going to have to move up to #8 or higher to get one of the top two cornerbacks. I don’t see any way Jerry lets one get past him at #9. That means some sort of Kolb trade for it to happen.

  2. 2 Tommy Lawlor said at 4:59 PM on March 31st, 2011:

    What about Tyron Smith? Seems like the Boys are in love with him. Or is that a smokescreen?

  3. 3 Tommy Lawlor said at 5:01 PM on March 31st, 2011:

    I should have used the caption:

    “Quintin Mikell knows the loneliness of the locked-out (team) leader. ”

    I’m just not sure how many people would have gotten the reference.


  4. 4 mcud said at 6:52 PM on March 31st, 2011:

    I think OT will be the pick for the Cowboys only if both of the blue-chip CBs are gone. At least, that seems to be the scuttlebutt here in the D/FW area.

    Terrence Newman will be cut, and many want Jenkins cut. He had an off-year to be sure, but there were two incidents during the season (one involving him laughing on the sideline after giving up a TD, and another after a Cromartie-esque tackle attempt that resulted in a TD). Even Orlando Scandrick seems to have fallen out of favor, and he was highly regarded by the staff. The last time a CB was taken in the top 5? Terrence Newman by the Cowboys. Add in the fact that Rob Ryan is the new DC, and the Cowboys already have two pretty nice pass rushing pieces (and investment) in place in Ware/Spencer. The Cowboys broke their trend recently in grabbing Dez Bryant and Felix Jones, but before them, they spent nine straight 1st round picks on defense, and they’ve never used a 1st rounder on an OL since Jerry has owned the team.

    I think the Cowboys believe that Doug Free would be the perfect RT, but are fine with going forward with him at LT, and letting Robert Brewster or Sam Young get a shot at the right side. They seem especially high on Brewster. Not to mention that Jason Garrett is arrogant, and had a lot of input on those guys being on the roster in the first place.

    If I were betting, I’d say the Cowboys move out of the #9 spot anyway, to select Patrick Peterson. But if they stay put, I’m definitely of the opinion that Prince would be the target. I could be very wrong, but that is the way I am reading the tea leaves here.

  5. 5 T_S_O_P said at 3:19 AM on April 1st, 2011:

    “How much input do positional coaches have in the draft?”

    I raised this in the old EMB (RIP), but 2-gap Jenkins was the positional coach when we drafted Bunkley. In fact, he had been position the same length of time as Washburn.

    “You can bet Mudd and Washburn spent a day or two meeting with the personnel guys to explain what kind of players they are looking for.”

    Which would suggest that Bunkley’s was viewed as a fit Jenkin’s system. He certainly showed that in ’08. Maybe the hope was that on passing downs, we could just turn him loose. The fact was though, he was substituted on such plays.

    I think Bunkley starts this season where he finished last season. Who apart from Bunkley, out of our high draft picks, have we not tried to resign before they reach UFA status? F Mitchell, McDougle, LJ Smith, and Trevor Laws. Anyone else? Not an inspiring list, particularly from advocates who believe we may resign both next year.

  6. 6 Davesbeard said at 5:28 AM on April 1st, 2011:

    I think it’d be a real mistake to let Q go unless he gets offered a significantly above average deal for a starter. I’m all for getting young and energetic but a body is no good without a head to lead it and from all I’ve read Q is just that within the locker room. With consistent play from Nate Allen he was back much closer to his 2008 levels of play and with a second year with a developed Allen he could really get back to being a top tier safety.

  7. 7 ATG said at 7:23 AM on April 1st, 2011:

    When reading about the linebackers, a lot of opinions are pretty high on Chaney. A fair number are ready to hand him the middle and push Stew to the outside, or to the door. Although he showed promise at the end of the season, how much should the fact that he was fresh and playing against guys with a full season on their backs hedge our expectations?

  8. 8 Sam said at 11:37 AM on April 1st, 2011:


    Re: Jenkins, keep in mind the significant tension between JJ and Jenkins before JJ let him really put in the 2-gap in 2007. I don’t think Jenkins was hired with a mind towards totally revamping our line play scheme, that was more the result than the intent. I don’t think JJ or AR or the FO appreciated that we were no longer going to be a 1-gap team when they drafted Bunk — I think they thought they were hiring a guy who could teach the system we had in place and perhaps enhance it on the margin.

    I think the situation is much different with Washburn. We KNOW he is going to revamp the line play, and that was the intent when he was hired.

  9. 9 Norman said at 11:48 AM on April 1st, 2011:

    RE: Trent Cole

    I hope now instead of using that great motor to play the run, he’ll be able to focus on his excellent pass rushing moves and maybe he’ll get the recognition he deserves as a top 5 DE in the league.

    RE: Q

    I don’t see how he doesn’t get an over the top contract though. Lesser safeties got signed for a lot last year, and Q is, whether the fans know it or not, a top flight SS for us. He’s gonna get paid, and he should (as much as this hurts), take the money. He deserves it.

    I can see why Philadelphia won’t match, I can see why he’d want to take a discount- but he shouldn’t. This is his future, his kids future, and his life he’s talking about.

  10. 10 izzylangfan said at 12:28 PM on April 1st, 2011:

    If you compare the Eagles and the Vikings from a couple of years ago when the Vikings had a great defensive line you can see the benefits of using the UT and the NT as the Vikings used compared to the two two-gap tackle approach that the Eagles used. The Eagles defensive ends were relatively disruptive individually ( each end got a disruption about 10% or more of the time – by disruption I mean: sacks, hurries, blocked passes, QB hits) as were the Vikings defensive ends. But the UT on the Vikings was similarly disruptive. While the eagles two-gap tackles only were disruptive about 2% of the time as was the Vikings nose tackle. But the difference is that overall the Vikings as a team should thus be disruptive on one out of three pass plays while the eagles would be disruptive on only one out of four pass plays.

  11. 11 Norman said at 12:46 PM on April 1st, 2011:

    RE: Vikings

    The thing you’re missing though, is while disruption increases, chances for big plays increase as well. Having stellar linebackers against the run (Greenway, Henderson) helped tremendously. However, because they invested here, they traditionally had a very poor secondary.

    Philadelphia skimped on the linebackers, had to switch to a 2-gap system to contain the run, and has traditionally had elite 2ndaries. I think what hurt us so bad last year is that we didn’t have a solid RCB, and the defense was built to cover the back end.

  12. 12 T_S_O_P said at 1:00 PM on April 1st, 2011:

    @ Sam

    I didn’t know about the tension between Jenkins and JJ, but when Tommy first wrote on the issue of when the 2-gap was introduced, I used the front seven blog on the old MB to check what “we” were saying at the time. Elements of the 2-gap were in place in ’06 according to “us” back then. I wrote at length about it in reply to Tommy’s article, including quotes by Just Relax and yourself, on the matter.

  13. 13 Sam said at 3:20 PM on April 1st, 2011:


    Missed the post you are talking about … was it here or on the EMB? If the latter, sorry I missed it, guess its gone forever.

    Either way, I specifically remember controversy in 2006, with JJ laying into Jenkins. Further, I also remember it being a question of “adding element” rather than the wholesale shift we saw in 2007. Point being, as I said, I think the shift was not planned as of the 2006 draft, I think it was a later development, even though Jenkins was there well before the draft.