Eagles Working Out Goff

Posted: March 28th, 2016 | Author: | Filed under: Philadelphia Eagles | 189 Comments »

I thought this might be a quiet Monday and then this.

I think that is good news, for a couple of reasons.

Let’s say the Eagles don’t have serious interest in Goff. They would know that, but not the other 31 teams. Go work out Goff and make them think you have interest. Teams won’t know who the Eagles really covet so that would make it more difficult to go get a player the Eagles like. If you know for a fact the Eagles want Ezekiel Elliott, you know you need to trade up to pick 7 to get ahead of them. If you think the Eagles like Myles Jack, Elliott, Goff and say Vernon Hargreaves, you don’t know what they’ll do.

Keep the other teams guessing.

I also happen to like Goff quite a bit and think it is smart for the Eagles to work him out.

I have no idea what ESP is thinking here. Sam Bradford was signed to a 2-year deal. He is the very definition of a short term QB. Goff would be the QB of the future. I understand the logic of adding a non-QB at 8 to give Bradford as much help as possible, but the draft is about long term thinking. You don’t select the best player for the 2016 Eagles. You add the best player for the Eagles of the next 5 to 10 years.

QB is a unique position. If you find the right guy, you can change the fortunes of your organization for years to come. Just think about the impact Donovan McNabb had on the Eagles. No titles, but consistently good teams. You can have a great DE like J.J. Watt or an elite WR like Calvin Johnson or a stud LT like Joe Thomas. Those guys have been through plenty of losing seasons.

If the Eagles think Goff is a franchise QB, then taking him at 8 is a no-brainer. The Packers took Aaron Rodgers in the 1st round when Brett Favre was still very good. That pick kept them one of the best teams in the league even after losing a Hall of Fame QB in Favre. QB is the most important position in pro spots. Just because you have Sam Bradford doesn’t mean you should pass on a young player you believe in. If Bradford somehow becomes one of the best QBs in the league and Goff is stuck on the bench…that’s kind of a good problem to have, right?

I need to do a lengthy write-up on Goff. For now, let me share some clips that show some of the things I like about him. 




Gifted passer.

That’s the kind of QB I want running my team.

The biggest question I have with Goff is whether he lasts to pick 8 or not. If not for his hand size, I could see him being a QB that Chip Kelly covets. I don’t know if Doug Pederson will like Goff as much as me. He might prefer Carson Wentz. I’m sure the Eagles will work out Wentz. They did have someone at his Pro Day, but Pederson said that he prefers private workouts so that is when the Eagles would send a key person to evaluate Wentz. And don’t forget that Pederson did watch him practice in Mobile, AL for 3 days. It isn’t like he’s some mystery guy.

Exactly, Les. Lots more workouts to come. The Eagles are gathering as much information as possible. Don’t mistake that for them loving a player.


189 Comments on “Eagles Working Out Goff”

  1. 1 The original AG said at 11:19 PM on March 28th, 2016:

    If he can lead us to the promised land, go get him.

  2. 2 Eagles Working Out Goff - said at 11:20 PM on March 28th, 2016:

    […] Tommy Lawlor I thought this might be a quiet Monday and then this. The #Eagles are working out Jared Goff in […]

  3. 3 Mac said at 11:29 PM on March 28th, 2016:

    This kid might be better than Nick Foles.

  4. 4 TypicalDouche said at 7:53 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    I don’t know if he is on Foles’ level yet, I haven’t had a chance to study his 15 step drop back that Nick Foles mastered so well.

  5. 5 the guy said at 11:31 PM on March 28th, 2016:

    Doug Pederson, Frank Reich, and Howie Roseman have been intimately involved in the decisions to draft guys like Aaron Murray, nobody, Mike Kafka, Nick Foles, and Matt Barkley. I don’t know about you, but with that kind of record I’m not worried at all.

  6. 6 Mac said at 11:36 PM on March 28th, 2016:

    Nick Foles is a HOF QB. Mike Kafka has elite hand warming skills. Matt Barkley netted a 7th round pick. Where’s your beef?

  7. 7 the guy said at 11:53 PM on March 28th, 2016:


  8. 8 Anders said at 2:26 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Are we comparing using 3rd to 5th round flyers on fringe QB prospect with drafting a QB in round 1?

  9. 9 the guy said at 2:28 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    No, we’re saying that not one person involved in the decision-making process has had any success whatsoever picking a QB, so maybe there’s cause for concern. And yes, that’s the royal “we”.

  10. 10 Rellihcs said at 4:41 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Right because nobody was around when they picked McNabb, oh wait, 66% not nobody, my b.

  11. 11 the guy said at 5:05 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    What? Howie Roseman was hired as a salary cap intern in 2000, a year after McNabb was drafted. Doug Pederson was the backup QB, so I doubt he was in the draft room.

  12. 12 Anders said at 6:04 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Again you are comparing day three talent with top tier talent.

  13. 13 the guy said at 5:04 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Actually I wasn’t. I was pointing out what QBs they could have reasonably been expected to have input on selecting.

  14. 14 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:06 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    You do realize they probably evaluated and had opinions on most of the QBs that have been drafted into the NFL, not just the ones that KC and the Eagles happened to draft?

  15. 15 the guy said at 5:07 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Of course they did. What’s your point?

  16. 16 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:09 PM on March 29th, 2016:


  17. 17 D3FB said at 5:20 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Hey, good news is Defillipo was QB coach when Sanchez and Jamarcus were rookies….

    OH GOD.

    I want to die.

    (good news he was also QB coach when the Raiders drafted Carr).

  18. 18 TypicalDouche said at 7:51 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Although Pederson and Reich may have had say to a degree as to what QB was drafted during their tenure, neither was the HC so I doubt they had an extensive say in the QB picking process. Also when it comes to Roseman you do know that when Reid was coach it was all his say during the draft and it’s been on record as Barkley being a Kelly picked QB. So your worried for no reason. Let’s see this team take a QB high, not like the late round bums you mentioned, then pass judgement.

  19. 19 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:49 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Most GMs don’t saddle their HC with a QB he doesn’t want, unless your owner is Dan Snyder of course.
    Roseman may pick other players Pederson ISNT sold on, but I assume Dougs opinipn of QBs matters more than the GMs opinion, but ONLY when it comes to the QB position

  20. 20 TypicalDouche said at 8:53 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    That I know. Yes he will have say now because Pederson is the HC. This guy was making references to guys who weren’t even HCs and putting blame on them for the QBS they were given.

  21. 21 the guy said at 5:01 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    So your contention is that when they were offensive coordinators, neither guy would have had input on QB selection?

  22. 22 TypicalDouche said at 5:50 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    If you read what I initially wrote correctly you can answer your own question. “Although Pederson and Reich may have had say to a degree as to what QB was drafted during their tenure, neither was the HC so I doubt they had an extensive say in the QB picking process.”

  23. 23 the guy said at 5:58 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I read it. I was just making sure. If they weren’t involved in the selection process, that seems like a bug, not a feature. The head coach didn’t value their input in a guy they’d be responsible for once he’s in the building?

    If we’re talking about what was initially written, my point was that the guys in charge of drafting a new QB have had limited experience and even less success. It’s not crazy to be concerned, even if they didn’t have a chance to pick a guy at the top of the draft. There’s nothing to indicate that anyone involved knows what to look for in a QB prospect. Doesn’t mean they can’t evaluate correctly or will get it wrong, but it’s something to keep in mind.

  24. 24 Mac said at 9:49 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    It’s like comparing apples to rotten apples.

  25. 25 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:04 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I assume there were also QBs they rated very highly who went on to validate their evaluations, but we weren’t able to draft them, since we do have to compete with 30 other teams to get playërs in the draft

  26. 26 Kristopher Cebula said at 12:12 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Of course ESP thinks it’s a bad idea to take a QB in round one. It would ruin his dream of the Eagles drafting Cardale Jones

  27. 27 Media Mike said at 7:13 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Ew. ESP wants us to take that abomination?

  28. 28 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:47 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Im surprised hearing that donkey ESP even knows who Jones is,,.

  29. 29 Kristopher Cebula said at 3:33 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    He hasn’t said it recently but he was all over cardales junk not that long ago

  30. 30 Media Mike said at 3:44 PM on March 29th, 2016:


  31. 31 sonofdman said at 12:59 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    ESP is a joke.

  32. 32 Rellihcs said at 4:38 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Why must up votes be limited!?

  33. 33 Ben said at 9:50 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    I have to agree, he even looks like a big douche.
    No offense to TypicalDouche.

  34. 34 Chiptomylou said at 10:01 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    The worst beat reporter for the Eagles, period. There are plenty of bad ones too.

  35. 35 BobSmith77 said at 6:36 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    That is a bit harsh.

  36. 36 daveH said at 3:27 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Did Blake really dump Gwen ??? Schit thats what the ad & photo staring at me says … Geen is an all time great. No Doubt used to rock and she is sofa legit that i dont mind that few years of painful pop schit she was making money off. Hope she didnt get face work .. love her new song, like back to her roots finally

  37. 37 Gary Barnes said at 5:34 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Peterson and the Eagles are on record for wanting to work out all the top QB in the next few weeks before the draft. Smokescreen or not, I think it is smart especially since they are working them out privately.

  38. 38 big Jes not here for grammar said at 6:16 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Can’t see the harm in knowing where’s they stand. As the line goes maybe they’ll be available free agents someday

  39. 39 Media Mike said at 7:12 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    “I have no idea what ESP is thinking here.”

    Nobody does. ESP, having special eunuch traits, had his brain removed along with his genitialia at some point.

  40. 40 Media Mike said at 7:15 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    “QB is the most important position in pro spots.”

    Say it again and again.

  41. 41 Media Mike said at 7:28 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Why not start the day with a Goff Mock

    Round 1 Pick 8: Jared Goff, QB, California (A+)
    Round 3 Pick 14: Adolphus Washington, DT/DE, Ohio State (A+)
    Round 3 Pick 16: Christian Westerman, OG, Arizona State (A)
    Round 4 Pick 2: Connor McGovern, OG, Missouri (B+)
    Round 5 Pick 14: Travis Feeney, OLB, Washington (A+)
    Round 5 Pick 25: Justin Simmons, FS, Boston College (B+)
    Round 6 Pick 13: Josh Ferguson, RB, Illinois (A+)
    Round 7 Pick 12: Deiondre’ Hall, CB, Northern Iowa (A+)
    Round 7 Pick 30: Daniel Braverman, WR, Western Michigan (A+)

  42. 42 bill said at 8:19 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    ” I understand the logic of adding a non-QB at 8 to give Bradford as much help as possible, but the draft is about long term thinking. You don’t select the best player for the 2016 Eagles. You add the best player for the Eagles of the next 5 to 10 years.”
    Exactly the reason why I think it’s silly to discount the ‘Boys taking a QB with their first pick.

  43. 43 Anders said at 8:23 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    The Cowboys are in win now mode more than anything. They wants to make one or two last pushes with Romo and will look back at 2014 and see they miss the golden RB

  44. 44 Media Mike said at 8:30 AM on March 29th, 2016:


    is all you need to know about Cowboys at 4.

  45. 45 bill said at 11:01 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    I hope he’s back in charge. Doesn’t seem like he has been the last few drafts.

  46. 46 A_T_G said at 8:31 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Right, while they watched Denver load up and take the Lombardi by focusing on the short term with an aging QB.

  47. 47 Tumtum said at 10:18 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Which is their downfall. IMHO.

  48. 48 bill said at 11:00 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Still think that even in win now mode, a cheap, good backup QB is their biggest need. What derailed last season for them? The parade of bargain basement, journeyman QBs that they trotted onto the field to replace Romo when he shockingly got injured. They’re kinda stuck, cap-wise, so they can’t afford to buy a good, veteran backup. So it’s either accept the fact that you’ll lose (conservatively) 3-4 otherwise winnable games due to Romo’s health, or maybe start thinking about getting a top end backup through the draft for him.

  49. 49 Fufina said at 8:34 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Cowgirls will be paying Romo to be their starter the next 2 years due to his cap hit of his current $32mil dead money. So whoever they draft will not be starting unless injury happens till 2018 (and Romo may well be playing well enough if he stays healthy to play well past that.)

    This could leave the Cowgirls in a similar situation to the Broncos… unproven QB coming up to his 2nd contract and a scary prospect to invest big money at that point.

    Personally i think they will look to go QB in 2nd or 3rd round – taking a Hackenberg to try and rebuild over 2-3 years or a Jones/Cook. If they love a QB at no.4 then i think they will take them, but while i love the upside of the big 3 QB’s all of them are high risk and need time (including playing time) to develop.

  50. 50 A**neck said at 9:47 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Oh my dear sweet baby Jesus, please let the Cowboys pick Cardale Jones in the 3rd round. Amen.

  51. 51 Tumtum said at 10:17 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    His body is just broken down. It is actually kind of sad. As much as I have loved to hate Romo over the years, I feel like a Batman with no Joker.

  52. 52 bill said at 10:55 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    If Romo starts 16 games in the rest of his career, I will be shocked. He’s got the body of a 60 year-old at this point. Peyton Manning was far more durable, and took a lot less hits in his career. Whoever they draft this year is pretty much guaranteed to start multiple games this season.

  53. 53 Dave said at 8:30 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    “The Packers took Aaron Rodgers in the 1st round when Brett Favre was still very good.”

    Favre was 36 and mulling retirement when Aaron Rodgers was drafted. If the Packers would have known Favre would have played to age 41, and would be effective for 5 additional years through age 40, I doubt Rodgers would have been drafted. In addition, Rodgers was on a free fall in the draft and lasted to pick 24. Again, I highly doubt the Packers would have taken him if they were picking #8 overall.

    I think this situation more closely mirrors the Chargers with Brees and Rivers. Brees put up mediocre stats for two years as the starter in San Diego. With the Chargers having the #1 pick, they felt like they couldn’t pass up on Eli/Rivers. Brees had the skill set to be exceptional at the QB position, just like Bradford, but had been less than average with his play for his first 3 years in the league.

    Ironically, if Rivers hadn’t held out of training camp his rookie year, Brees may not have been named the starter for the 2004 season. Followed by a Pro Bowl season in 2004, Rivers was left on the bench for a 2nd season in 2005 before Brees left via free agency for the 2006 season. I don’t necessarily think the plan was to sit Rivers for 2 years, but it still worked out OK (more so for Brees).

  54. 54 RobNE said at 9:25 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    so that Bradford will become as good as Brees?! sweet.

  55. 55 Dave said at 9:32 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Under this scenario, it would be for a different team.

  56. 56 P_P_K said at 11:17 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    I think the Packers were aniticpating Farve retiring sooner than he did.

  57. 57 Dave said at 11:20 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Exactly. That was the beginning of the wishy-washy Favre retirement Era. Nobody could have guessed it would have lasted 5 years.

  58. 58 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:44 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    This being “good news” is a stretch at least at this point…I would call it common sense.
    Im not interested in Goff but it would be negligent to have the #8 pick and not thoroughly evaluate him..
    the media is going to present each visit like it means something, but it’s safe to say the Eagles will do their homework on all of the top 10 prospects, and if they don’t, shame on them

  59. 59 Dan in Philly said at 8:48 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    So many examples of QBs who ended up being great who sat a while after being drafted. Used to be common wisdom they needed a year on the bench before starting.
    Montana, Brady, Rogers, heck even Steve Young sat behind Montana for a while after his first go around.
    I personally would love if we draft a QB and sat him a year or even two.

  60. 60 Gian GEAGLE said at 8:51 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Id love to sit a rookie QB for 3 or 4 years,,…

  61. 61 RobNE said at 9:24 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    right b/c that would mean our starter is playing great.

  62. 62 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:32 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Yes sir. That would mean we are contending with a starter playing elite ball, it would mean not exposing a kid who is a novice QB (reading NFL defenses) to rack up hits and injuries during the infancy stage of his career, and it would mean not putting the kid on the field TIL he has had years of preperation to learn the offense like the back of his hand.
    Young Qbs can win Super Bowls if your roster is stacked enough to allow them to win half their games in a 20 passing attempt game manager Role.. But your young QB won’t be ready to carry a franchise to a Super Bowl win TIL years 4 or 5 anyway.. I don’t Imagine that we would hear Aaron Rodgers or Brock Osweiler regret having to sit a few years behind Favre and Peyton.
    A legit Franchse QB can play 17 years. It’s extremely short sited to think you can’t keep one on the bench for 3 years TIL exposing your investment. Of course we are talking about the richest of “rich man problems”… You gotta have a veteran QB playing at an extremely high level to be able to keep a kid like Jameis WInston on your bench for 3 years, so it’s so rare that teams will be in that position, but for the lucky 2% that can pull it off, It doesn’t get any better than that…

  63. 63 Mac said at 12:18 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    That sounds uncomfortable… for everyone.

  64. 64 A_T_G said at 12:49 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    After sitting that long his legs would have atrophied to the point where they look like…well, like Bradford’s.

  65. 65 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:21 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Depends on the QB he is playing behind, it’s so damn rare that we will see teams in a position where they can afford to keep an elite QB prospect on the Bench for years. But that’s the ideal situation by far IMO.
    I see nothing uncomfortable about a top QB prospect sitting behind BRady, Brees, Rodgers for 3 years. I see that as more of a dream scenario than an uncomfortable scenario… But being in THAT position is like the Rarest thing to pull off.
    I think the Colts made a massive mistake letting Peyton Manning Walk. he could have been their QB for 3 more years (if he stayed healthy), and if he got hurt, Luck could have stepped in earlier, ELITE QBs can play a very Long time. it be great to be in such a great position that you can afford to sit Andrew Luck for 3 years… Typically, im a firm believer that a QB won’t be ready to carry a team to the Super Bowl before his 4th, or 5th season, especially a QB drafted #1 overall to a bad team. the Exceptions are guys like Rothlisberger and Russell Wilson who had such a stacked team around them, that they were able to win like half their games playing as a game manager role at the beginning of their careers. wilson and Rothlisberger weren’t carrying their team in MVP season type performances to Super Bowl wins… A nice portion of Wilson’s Super Bowl run was in a game manager role throwing 20 times for 200 yards,,,Luck could do that all day as a rookie, but wouldn’t have a good enough team around him to win a SUPERBOWL playing that modest role.
    I don’t think QB’s HAVE to play early to Develope properly. If you are lucky enough to be able to contend without playing your young QB, and the kid you draft is developing just fine without playing, I can also see some value in not exposing the future of your franchise to big hits early in his career while he is a novice. I can also see Tremendous value in not putting your Franchise QB on the field until yeàr 3 or 4 when he learns the offense like the back of his hand, has had years of studying NFL defenses.
    If your young QB hits a Plataeu developing without getting game time, then it could become a Problem,,, but for me having a top QB you can contend with the next 3 years, while the future of your franchise sits and learns, and ISNT exposed until he gets a few years to prepare himself is the Holy Grail of ideal QB scenarios, which is why I think the Colts were short sited thinking they had to get rid of Peyton because they wanted to draft Luck.
    they could have gotten 3 solid years out of Peyton, eliminate all the early hits and injuries Luck was exposed to the first few years. After 3 years, Manning retires as a Colt, Luck takes the field with 3 years of PREPERATION in the same Offense, and he has yeàr 4 and 5(if you aren’t completely sold on him before then) to show you that he NEEDS to be Paid a big money extension… IMO The only reason it would have been better to move on from Peyton is if you think you just ARENT going to be able to put a good enough team to really contend with Peyton during his last 3 years..
    For me, whether an immature kid understands this or not at the beginning of his career, it’s Much better to be in an Aaron Rogers, Jimmy Garappolo, Brock Osweiler situation than it is to be in a Jameis Winston, Andrew Luck situation, even for the QBs that have been able to prove that they can handle playing early on.. you ain’t carrying a team to a Super Bowl win before years 4 or 5 anyway, and if you go on to be a franchise QB for 17 years, sitting and learning the first few years is the best case scenario as long as your coaches and the Kid can continue developing and growing that QB without giving him game Experience..
    It only gets uncomfortable if you try sitting a kid behind an average QB who isn’t winning anything for the team. if you have a elite veteran QB, and a roster that allows you to contend, and the team is succeeding, a Young QB can’t afford to make it u comfortable because he will find an entire Roster of players who are in position to win Now against him…. Before Aaron Rodgers really got a chance to grow and over time prove to his teammates that he can play even Tho Brett Favre was also playing at a top Level.
    Let’s say Jimmy Garappolo wants to play right away, and happens to look good in Practice, what do you think the 53 other players would say if he made it uncomfortable and refused to accept his role behind Brady? He would find an entire Roster and Coaches against him.. let’s say Brock Osweiler decided that he was sick of not playing during those years when Manning was playing at an MVP level, he would have had veterans punching him in his mouth every time he tried to make things uncomfortable, not accept his role, and create a distraction for veterans who have a chance to contend for a Super Bowl.
    For me that’s easily The most ideal situation you can ever be in as a franchise, and as a QB in the infancy stages of his career. But that’s so damn rare to be able to pull off, that’s like Rich man problems to The extreme. it’s not a very attainable goal for most franchises

  66. 66 BobSmith77 said at 2:48 PM on March 29th, 2016:


  67. 67 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:26 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Because I think that is best for QB development.
    Even if we had a cant miss Andrew Luck, Jameis type, If possible, I think its better for the kid to sit for 3 years, than it is to play them right away, and I feel that way even about Qbs that have had success early in their careers
    Of course, not many teams are in such a great position where they have a top QB and can afford to keep a kid like Luck on the bench for 3’years, so it’s rare…
    What the Patriots are doing with Jimmy Garrapolo, and what GB did with A-Rod IMO is best case scenario for every QB prospect… It’s just so rare that a team has such a great starting QB that they can afford to keep a kid like Luck on the bench for 3 years.

  68. 68 BobSmith77 said at 6:38 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Maybe a year especially if it is a So. or Jr. but 3 or 4 years is a non-starter and impractical.

  69. 69 Media Mike said at 9:18 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    SIt ’em should be even more common with a first rounder because you essential get a chance to steal from the guy in year 5.

  70. 70 Dave said at 11:04 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Year 5 would be the transition tag number (for top 10 picks), which is basically where Sam is this year. Not really a steal when the franchise tag is only $2M more for a QB.

  71. 71 Teknomancer said at 12:03 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I could be wrong but I believe Mike’s referring to the rookie contract structures that are a result of the new CBA. If I remember correctly, the first 10 picks get 4 year deals and the rest of the 1st rounders have what amount to 5 year deals with the 5th year being a ‘team option’ year of sorts (see Fletcher Cox). Either way since Bradford was drafted in the last year before the new CBA took effect, neither of these scenarios apply. If he was referring to the transition tag then you are certainly correct that currently there isn’t much of a difference.

  72. 72 Dave said at 12:13 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    The fifth-year salary varies depending on how high the player was drafted. The top 10 selections receive a salary equal to the average of the 10 highest salaries. For the remainder of the first round, the wage is the average of the third through twenty-fifth highest salaries at the position.

    The transition tag is a one-year contract equal to the average salary of the top ten players in the league at the player’s position, or a twenty percent salary increase, whichever is greater. So basically, the 5th year option is the same price as the transition tag.

    I used Bradford’s contract this year as a comparison to show the 5th year option for a QB selected in the top ten is not cheap.


  73. 73 Teknomancer said at 12:31 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Good stuff, thanks for the clarification / correction, not sure why I thought the top 10 didn’t have an option year. I was aware there was a price drop of sorts after the top 10, now I know the details haha.

  74. 74 FairOaks said at 12:38 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Yep, drafting a guy in the top 10 has a big difference in the 5th year option. Lane Johnson would not have been a huge bargain, but Fletcher Cox sure would be.

  75. 75 Media Mike said at 2:00 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Still a steal if you look at then only having to use a regular tag in year 6 and the 120% tag in year 7,

  76. 76 Dave said at 4:17 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Over 7 years, the average per year is a steal, as are all rookie deals. The yearly average from year 5 on (until cut, traded, or retired) would be tremendous.

  77. 77 Tumtum said at 10:16 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Didn’t that really just stop with Flacco and Ryans? They seriously changed the game as I recall.

  78. 78 theindianeagle said at 11:55 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Honestly, I don’t think it’s whether you let them sit or not. I think it’s more about the organization and do they foster an environment conducive to quarterback growth. Do you think Flacco and Ryans would have been as successful as they were if they were drafted by the Browns or Raiders?

    Sometimes you get a transcendent QB who can turn around any organization but I feel like majority of the time, the organization needs to have the structure to allow a QB to grow and evolve in their system.

  79. 79 Tumtum said at 12:11 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    My only concern about throwing a guy out there as a rookie is that if he struggles/gets sacked 100000x, it could have a lasting mental effect. Sure that might mean he was never the guy in the first place, but who knows? Thinking Derrick Carr’s older brother (David?)

  80. 80 theindianeagle said at 12:25 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I don’t disagree with you on that. Which kind of brings me back to my point, because in a well-run organization, the system is in place for any average QB to make you a playoff team, but you need an above average QB to win a Super Bowl – I think back to the Ravens and Steelers. Until they got Big Ben and Flacco (who I don’t consider elite), they were basically mediocre – those guys put them over the top. So I think that in a well-run organization, the rookie year is more beneficial than it is detrimental to the QBs growth.

    I think Goff and Wentz are capable of being at least as good as Flacco, so I just hope the Eagles have a similar team building philosophy.

  81. 81 RobNE said at 9:28 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    how do you decide who goes to the workout? Like why not the OC? Why is the GM more important than say the head scout? Does Howie manage/coordinate the personnel, or does he actually scout at a level above everyone else that it’s him that you send.

  82. 82 Sean Stott said at 1:14 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Those guys are sitting in coach, not first class.

  83. 83 RobNE said at 1:24 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    makes sense. but they still get free sandwiches from Nova Care right?

  84. 84 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:19 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Scouts have already seen these kids up close for years, Scouts evaluations are probably mostly complete by now, and it’s now time for the Coaches and GMs to form there opinions of these kids, Once The GM and HC complete their evaluations, they can all have a big meeting with the entire scouting department, compare and contrast evaluations to start and form their final draft boards as a team

  85. 85 BobSmith77 said at 10:01 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    So is Roseman going to hire a Director of Misinformation or has he already hired one?

  86. 86 Tumtum said at 10:15 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Do you like or dislike the fact that this could just be a tactic to mislead?

  87. 87 BobSmith77 said at 11:09 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    I’m perfectly fine with it and expect Roseman to do it.

    Thought the Eagles being linked to a QB lately including the article last week about moving up to get Wentz are classic examples of this.

    Eagles’ purposely leak this out to select outlets to enhance the odds that someone they really want drops to #8.

  88. 88 Tumtum said at 12:16 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Good good, and figured as much from the normal stuff you post. Was making sure you weren’t one of the tin foilers who gets all bent out of shape when the FO lies.

  89. 89 BobSmith77 said at 2:29 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Sure the Eagles would be psyched if both Wentz/Goff went in the Top 8 picks.

    It just notably increases the odds that someone they want drops to #8 but also increases the odds that another team might be willing to pay a decent price to move up to #8 too.

    Drafting either one of these QBs in the Top 7 seems like a real reach for either one.

  90. 90 FairOaks said at 12:36 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I think Roseman has said in the past they tend to work out almost all the top QBs regardless. But it would make particular sense this year, without a real idea of where they are going. One could fall, and could be the subject of a trade. And having some background info on a QB might well help in the years ahead when they are opponents.

  91. 91 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:16 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I don’t even want Goff, but it would be highly irresponsible of them to not Thoroughly evaluate him.
    I think this is simply due dilligence, and we are the ones that try to put a “tipping their hand” or “smoke screen” element to it.
    They would have to be really stupid to not do their due dilligence on a projected top 10 pick..
    We also have to keep in mind, that Decisions HAVENT been made on Playërs yet. We all hope to read into any clue we can get. but reality is they went to evaluate Goff to try and figure out how they feel about him. Not because they want him, and not because they already know that they don’t want him.
    Evaluations of prospects are no where near complete yet… Visits are to continue evaluating them, not strategic draft day ploys

  92. 92 A_T_G said at 12:04 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I haven’t read anything about them hiring one…which either means they haven’t or the one they did hire is really good at his job.

  93. 93 Teknomancer said at 12:19 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Howie is the Head of Misinformation, he just does it under a covert name.

  94. 94 BobSmith77 said at 2:34 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Roan’s next job is to get Elliott into the NovaCare Complex for a workout and say how impressed they were with him too.

  95. 95 Tumtum said at 10:12 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    You know ESP really strikes me as a guy who always wanted to write news. He just happens to be on the Eagles beat because that is his assignment. Guy doesn’t really seem grasp football or organized sport.

    I am guessing at this of course. He just makes me scratch my head so often, and my only explanation is that he never actually followed football closely/played sports with any level of real seriousness.

    All part of the give and take of the sports writer/analyst I suppose. No less enjoyable than the Meril Hodge/Heath Miller types who really only know about football, and suck at the analytic part of the job.

  96. 96 C-Dub said at 1:40 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Heath Miller? You mean the you-can’t-win-without-a-FB Heath Evans?

  97. 97 Tumtum said at 3:57 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Yep got me. My fault.. little faux pas. I like Heath Miller…. for now.

  98. 98 Call Me Carlos the Dwarf said at 10:37 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    ESP doesn’t have any idea what ESP is talking about, either.

    He never does.

  99. 99 A_T_G said at 10:47 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Every time I read the initials ESP I am reminded of the acronym with the same initials. It is on the edge of my memory like some kind of sixth sense. I believe the acronym is shorthand for Especially Stupid Postulating. Something like that.

  100. 100 Rob Jarratt said at 11:11 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    No, no. Entertainment and Sports Programming…Numbnuts!

  101. 101 Mac said at 11:29 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    I’d hazard that he utilizes electromagnetic shielding plates to protect himself from Roger Goodell’s mind control ray.

  102. 102 A_T_G said at 10:50 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Now that we are into the bargain basement portion of free agency, should we have any interest in Steven Ridley, healthy and visiting teams?

    And, yes Mike, this could be an avenue to removing Barner from the roster.

  103. 103 RobNE said at 1:23 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    no more ex-pats please

  104. 104 Media Mike said at 1:59 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I like that, but on behalf of all PIAA District One athletes….. RIDLEY SUCKS.

    I’ll be happy to have Barner gone, but I’m not sure if I could deal with that many “Ridley” jerseys all over the place.

  105. 105 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:51 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Right when he was supposed to break through and become a top RB, he started to go the other direction. Im sure injuries played some role in it… But the Last team that should pay to add Ridley is a team with two veterans like sproles and Mathews. RB isn’t just a need, but it’s a position we have to start getting younger at.

  106. 106 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:10 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    If Chip Kelly was still in charge, Id expect us to sigń Ridley or Arian Foster lol
    But now that we have a “grown up” in charge again, we NEED to add Young Legs at RB. We shouldn’t have ANY Room to add a veteran RB.
    The Only way it makes any sense to sigń a RB is if we plan on trading Ryan Mathews to someone like the Dolphins on Draft Night.
    The RB we add needs to be a young kid who we have on a rookie contract for the next 4 or 5 years.

  107. 107 Dave said at 11:23 AM on March 29th, 2016:


    “The 49ers and Eagles have had rumored interest in quarterbacks, but I’ve been almost told to almost entirely rule out the Eagles making a move or drafting a quarterback at #8, and doubt Goff to the 49ers at 7th overall; They have their eyes on other quarterbacks later the draft, though he may be in play should Goff slip on draft day.”

  108. 108 RobNE said at 1:23 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    so you pass on first round talent b/c you have your eye on someone in the 3rd round. that makes no sense to me.

  109. 109 TypicalDouche said at 1:27 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    When referencing Chip Kelly, nothing really makes sense Rob. You’ll give yourself a brain aneurysm trying to figure him out.

  110. 110 Crus57 said at 6:28 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    would show Chip learns, because our Chip would’ve tried to draft the third round talent in the first round until Howie talked him out of it.

  111. 111 Gian GEAGLE said at 2:40 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Always assumed this was the case,,.
    Without a 2nd round pick. I think it’s unrealistic to expect us to trade into the top 5. #6 is the highest I can see us moving up, but it would have to be for someone like Jack or Buckner for me to be excited about moving to #6.
    We have the 8th pick in the draft, and no second round pick. not for Nothing, but we should be able to sit at #8 and get a kid who will go on to become on of our best players. If Roseman can’t get top tier talent at #8, that’s an epic failure. I don’t think we should have to trade up to get a Stud that can have a big impact of our Future,,,,
    if Goff Falls to #8, for me, I’d rather use him to get our 2nd round pick back from the Rams which would give us five top 100 picks which is amazing for us. I don’t like Goff as a top 10 player, but if our Offensive coaches see something truly special in him, they should take him.. But I dont see it in him, so it would surprise me to see the Eagles take him…
    Ultimately, I really don’t give a crap about my pre draft opinion of a player. I don’t really care what positions we draft,,, the ONLY thing that matters to me is making this first round pick Count! 4 years from now, the Kid we draft better be one of our key franchise cornerstones… That’s really the only thing that matters to me. I don’t have to love a prospect, he doesn’t have to fill a key immediate Need, all i care about is that they get it right, and make the most out of a rare opportunity for us to come away with one of the ten best players from this class..

  112. 112 Anders said at 3:03 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    So in other news the eagles will take a qb at 8th or trade up if the price is right. There if zero chance he knows anything about the eagles draft strategy

  113. 113 scratcherk said at 11:41 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Love the quick release Goff has. His W-L record and hand size are the biggest concerns I have.

  114. 114 ACViking said at 11:48 AM on March 29th, 2016:

    Here’s a QB whose build and game look very much like Goff’s.
    Skip ahead to the 1-minute mark to see highlights at regular speed.

  115. 115 BobSmith77 said at 2:38 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I thought you were a fan of Goff.

    Walsh’s NFL career was underwhelming at best and it isn’t unfair to label him a bust either.

    Not beating out Aikman was one thing but he got beat out of jobs by Hobert and Wilson with the Saints and by Kramer with the Bears.

  116. 116 ACViking said at 3:31 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I still like Goff (for as long as Belichick likes him, since I’m no scout).

    Just that Walsh’s build and delivery struck me as a lot like Goff’s.

    Also, Walsh was pretty highly regarded in ’89 . . .

    Enough that the Cowboys’ Jimmy Johnson gave up a 1st Rd pick for him in the supplemental draft — coming off a 1-15 season (when the Supp Drft was based on the April draft order).

    Had Walsh been the Cowboys QB instead of Aikman from ’91-’95, maybe the conversation’s very different. (Not that he wins three SBs, but whoever was QB’ing that group was going to win lots of games).

  117. 117 Tumtum said at 12:23 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I’ll be the first to say that I don’t follow the college game. That causes me to really not get into the draft. Rarely do I get into a draft discussion as it relates to specific players. I focus on the areas of need and the value of positions at different areas of the draft.

    So take what I say next with a large chunk of salt: I prefer Goff to Wentz.

    My basis for this preference is that Goff came out as a very hyped freshman. Got injured, and instead of going away he came back out again as a very highly touted guy. Wentz it seems came out of no where.

    Really analytical I know…

  118. 118 Mac said at 12:17 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    People getting really excited about Pederson and Roseman Goffing together.

  119. 119 ACViking said at 1:40 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    For SPARQ Believers . . .

    Ramsey's SPARQ score is better than 99% of NFL CBs March 29, 2016

  120. 120 Insomniac said at 1:47 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    For reference and more context.

    Vic Beasley – 151.5 sparq score
    Byron Jones – 150.8 sparq score
    Jalen Ramsey – 142.8 sparq score
    Chris Conley – 141.8 sparq score

    I think we need a new word for freakish athleticism ever since Byron Jones redefined it.

  121. 121 ACViking said at 2:06 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    BJones must be one of the two CBs in the “1%” mentioned in the tweet.

    Who’s the other CB?

    (32 teams x 6 CBs/team = 192 CBs total x 0.01 = 2 players)

  122. 122 Media Mike said at 2:12 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    JaCorey Shepherd, duh.

  123. 123 Insomniac said at 2:15 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    No clue. The 3stigma website doesn’t seem to keep older information available for the public.

    Another tidbit. Hargreaves is in the 97% but I guess that 4.5s 40 makes him too slow.

  124. 124 ACViking said at 2:17 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I —

    Really liked the list of freakish SPARQ scores you posted.

    Top 2 almost make Ramsey pedestrian.

  125. 125 Insomniac said at 2:24 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    True but who wouldn’t look bad when compared to the guys that are in the 99.9%?

    I’m guessing the 100% is reserved for Bo Jackson.

  126. 126 Media Mike said at 2:27 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Or Mike Mamula

  127. 127 Mac said at 2:31 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Or Bryce Brown.

  128. 128 anon said at 2:46 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Could have saved a lot of money on demarco. BB was the king of running to the oustside ironoic chip cut him for that and then proceeded to run to the sidelines every play.

  129. 129 Insomniac said at 2:31 PM on March 29th, 2016:


  130. 130 Anders said at 3:01 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Calvin Johnsson, JJ watt and lane Johnson are 3 of the freaks, with Byron Jones as the 4th 3 sigma athlete.

    The seahawks has a 4 sigma ol in one of the guys they converted last year, but quite a few DL would be 3 sigma athletes if they converted

  131. 131 Dave said at 4:26 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Eric Rowe at 133.7, not too shabby.

  132. 132 BobSmith77 said at 2:41 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    What is a SPARQ score?

  133. 133 ACViking said at 3:34 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    acronym for Speed, Power, Agility, Reaction and Quickness

    Folks on this blog have commented about Seattle’s success using this rating system in the past.

  134. 134 BobSmith77 said at 6:36 PM on March 29th, 2016:


  135. 135 Tumtum said at 4:05 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Hopefully his physical ability is only half of what makes him good though. Otherwise the NFL is going to be rough go for em.

    Too bad the Eagles won’t be in position to figure it out with him.

  136. 136 MattE said at 1:41 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Not knowing what Tennessee and Cleveland are doing is the biggest mystery for the whole league right now… i think Howie needs to be prepared for every possible situation to the best of his ability…. this years draft reminds me of the year Lane Johnson was drafted, no true “Sexy Pick’s” at QB (i.e. RG3 and Luck). Would it have served KC well to trade out of #1 and not take Eric Fischer that year? Maybe?

    In retrospect we got the best of those 3 OL and we got him at #4…. hard to say not only do you want a good player @#1- #5 but IMO you are looking for a potential franchise changer too if at all possible.

    Tennessee & Cleveland both have bad enough rosters where trading out can be justified, KC that year wasn’t too bad from a talent standpoint (deny/confirm)?

  137. 137 Gian GEAGLE said at 3:06 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I think Cleveland taking Wentz is probably a safe bet..
    ramsey is my favorite player in This class, but I just find it so hard to believe that a team would take a DB with a top 2 pick… Replacing Weddle for the chargers at #3 is the highest I see Ramsey going, and even spending the 3rd pick on a DB isnt something we see often.
    This years top 7 could fall so many different ways,,, Id love to see Wentz. goff and Zeke all drafted ahead of us, ensuring we come away with Tunsl, Ramsey, Buckner, Bosa or Jack… Getting one of those 5 players would be a home run as far as I’m concerned. I see those 5 as The cream of this years crop, but even if we can’t get one of those 5, shame on Roseman if he doesn’t get a special player at #8. I expect premier talent from the #8th spot. It be nice to see that talent come in the form of one of the more valued positions, but I’d take a “Great” RB or Guard(or whatever positions we devalue) over a “good” Tackle, or DE (or whatever premier position)
    Since this is obviously NOT a 1 offseason rebuild, take the very best talent available. hit on enough of our Draft picks this year and it should put us in a position next year where we can be a little more picky about positions.
    As we stand today, on paper we have a starter at just about every position, and we Could use added depth pretty much everywhere with the exception of maybe TE, So for where we are right now in terms of building this roster, I just think it’s so much more important that we come away with a special player who will go on to be up there with Cox and Lane as our highest rated core players of our future, than it is to target certain positions, or devalue certain positions..
    If we have one of our better drafts, we should be in a different position next year, where we can be a little bit more picky on what positions we add, but the roster ISNT there yet, so I hope we focus on the Player/Talent, and not allow positions to effect our evaluation

  138. 138 ACViking said at 3:37 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Earl Thomas III allows Seattle to do pretty much anything it wants in the Back 7.

    No matter who Seattle runs out there at CB, they look pretty good with Thomas playing centerfield.

    If a team plays Ramsey the same way, that team’s now improved 3 positions — not just 1.

    So maybe he’s worth the top pick

  139. 139 Greg Richards said at 5:52 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    So…..Ramsey won’t slip to 8?

  140. 140 ACViking said at 5:59 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Since Thomas, it seems like the safety position’s become more important and harder to fill.

    Throw in Ramsey’s size and athleticism and it’s hard seeing him slide past JAX, especially.

    But you never know.

  141. 141 Dave said at 3:38 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    The problem with that draft, and possibly this year’s too, is that without a QB worth trading up for, nobody will give Tennessee or Cleveland a ransom as they will most-likely require. The Skins obviously thought RGIII was a no-doubt-about-it franchise QB (as many other teams thought as well) and were willing to give up the farm to get him. This year, any one of the top QBs may be a franchise QB, but nobody is declaring them can’t miss prospects.

  142. 142 MattE said at 12:42 PM on March 30th, 2016:

    ultimately i don’t think we would have to give up as much as the RG3 deal to get to #2 if Howie is so inclined, the other thing is that with the new CBA and rookie wage scale Washington was only set back 3-4 years, not a decade, which IMO is a much more manageable gamble for a possible franchise QB.

  143. 143 Insomniac said at 2:44 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    This is probably the longest and most profane analysis I’ve seen on Ronnie Stanley. Entertaining read since Steve White was a former NFL player.


  144. 144 Media Mike said at 3:13 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Great read. Thank you for posting it.

  145. 145 mksp said at 6:40 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    This was great.

  146. 146 A_T_G said at 3:10 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Patriots sign EJ Biggers to an $840K 1-year deal.

    And this doesn’t seem to get the same reaction as the lead story…

  147. 147 ACViking said at 3:41 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Ah . . . so the visit to Goff was cover up the Eagles’ much greater interest in Hogan.

    The “Art of the Steal” — by Howie Roseman

  148. 148 BobSmith77 said at 7:02 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    If the Eagles somehow win a SB in the next few years, who plays Roseman in the movie based upon the future Michael Lewis’ book about Roseman, Kelly, and the Eagles?

  149. 149 sonofdman said at 10:20 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    How about Eddie Jeminson (from Ocean’s 11 and some other stuff)?

  150. 150 James Adair said at 12:34 PM on March 31st, 2016:

    Fred Savage

  151. 151 Tumtum said at 4:01 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Bye Felicia!!

  152. 152 A_T_G said at 3:13 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    The evidence seems to be piling up, the Eagles are not going to discount any position when they are drafting. It doesn’t matter that it isn’t a position of immediate need. It doesn’t matter that the two players on the roster have both been starters in the past. They are going to select the player that is the best at his position and a talent for the next decade. https://twitter.com/MsMiyayo305/status/710194838550007809

    And it isn’t hard to see why…

    If he is even still available…

  153. 153 Dave said at 3:33 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Not as far-fetched as you would think. Remember when the Raiders selected Janikowski with the 17th overall pick in the 2000 NFL Draft 😮

  154. 154 FairOaks said at 5:26 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Raiders also took punter Ray Guy in the first round (23rd overall) in 1973 😉

    Raiders always drafted a bit strangely but Guy is now in the hall of fame, and Janikowski could well get there.

    8 overall is another matter though. Other positions are on the field a lot more and can have a bigger impact, though if he’s truly a generational talent that would be a big deal. Having a FG kicker that basically never misses would be *huge*. But you can’t know how he deals with the mental aspects in the NFL — once they lose confidence for whatever reason it can be trouble.

  155. 155 A_T_G said at 8:28 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Alright, you guys are scaring me now. I was just kidding.

  156. 156 TypicalDouche said at 3:37 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    A lot of this talk about Aguayo sounds eerily familiar to one Alex Henery.

  157. 157 Tumtum said at 4:00 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Yeah that guy is one that would make you double check the yard markers match the college and NFL. His little noodle was a problem from day one.

  158. 158 FairOaks said at 5:22 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    And yet I remember some board posters who watched many Nebraska games, and emphatically said he was absolute money in college and on long FGs too. You’d think that would be the position that would translate the most from college to the pros — maybe even easier since the hash marks are closer together in the pros — but there is something about the mental transition which is very difficult and very unpredictable.

  159. 159 Rambo said at 3:58 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Free agent Anquan Boldin is visiting the Redskins on Tuesday.

    It’s Boldin’s first visit of free agency. Although he’s going on 36 and has lost a step or two, Boldin remained effective for an awful 49ers offense in 2015. He’s easily the best wideout remaining in free agency. He’d probably just be a depth signing for the Redskins, but there’s an outside chance his addition would mean the release of Pierre Garcon.

  160. 160 Gian GEAGLE said at 4:47 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    that be great. I assume Garcon is a much better play at this stage of their careers. Im happy to see all our Rivals downgrade instead of upgrading positions, Garcon is probably still a legit Solid starting WR, where as I wouldn’t expect Boldin to be more than a #3, more likely #4 WR who at best can be a role player on a playoff team… Garcon can still be expected to be a #1 or #2 starting WR… Be awesome to see our Rival cut him and replace him with a role player.
    IMO, if the skins think that they are ready to win a playoff game or two, they should view Boldin as a role player weapon to add to Desean, Garcon, and Reed. At this stage I think legit contenders should look to add him as a #5, who they DONT need to play Big Minutes in the regular season, but will give them an added experienced weapon during their playoff run…. A team like The Patriots, or Packers should look to add Boldin, Id be thrilled to see a Rival think they can replace one of their starters with him

  161. 161 anon said at 4:53 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Boldin has size, doesn’t need speed would be good chain mover for their short / quick pass game. Be interested to see $$. Between him, reed, djax, those are pretty tough matchups.

  162. 162 Gian GEAGLE said at 5:00 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    When it comes to Boldin, for some reason it seems like Fans think this guy is going to play at a high level forever. I assume he has already declined in a big way from the guy who had a big role in the Ravens Super Bowl run, and it’s only going to get worse. I welcome any of our Rivals to try and go into the season with Boldin as one of their starting Wrs.. Be my guest

  163. 163 BobSmith77 said at 6:55 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Yup and he makes sense for them as a #4 at the right dollars.

    Still think the Skins have the best GM in the NFC East right now and it is scary to see they are being run much more competently without going after the ‘shiny object’ via FA or the draft.

    The Skins without a meddlesome Snyder or his toadies inferring in player personnel routinely are a more worrisome opponent. They also dumped RGIII and don’t appear as willing to deal with players who cause a real wake either off the field without the corresponding production on it.

    If they draft well again, I could see them winning 9-10 games this year and taking the NFC East again.

  164. 164 anon said at 10:36 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    it’s terrible, not sure how theyre keeping hm on the wagon, but howie should have sent him a case for making the playoffs.

  165. 165 Greg Richards said at 5:09 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    They’d be more likely to release Andre Roberts than Garcon IMO. That would reduce Crowder to the #4 WR. If you’re going to sign Boldin, he at least has to be part of your top 3 WRs as he’s not going to provide help on STs. Of course, that didn’t stop Chip from signing Miles Austin(and guaranteeing him(what was it?) $20M dollars.

  166. 166 ACViking said at 4:03 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Benjamin Allbright is on WIP (or may have just wrapped up).

  167. 167 Dave said at 6:35 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    The magical mystery tour continues tomorrow.


  168. 168 BobSmith77 said at 6:40 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    More Misinformation including the inevitable followup stories the day after in select news outlets about how the Eagles were really ___ (fill in the verb) with Wentz’s ____ (noun) and ____ (noun) with rumors about them trading up to get him getting stoked a bit.

    I’ll lose a decent-sized wager if the Eagles move up or stay at #8 and pick either a QB/RB with that pick. If the Eagles do I expect Roseman’s head to emit a loud-pitched noise and then explode ala ‘Scanners’ movie.


  169. 169 Dave said at 6:44 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    The funny thing about this is that the CBA prohibits them from seeing Sam throw in person, but can go around the country for private workouts with college quarterbacks.

  170. 170 BobSmith77 said at 6:52 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Good point. A friend is convinced they’ll take the ‘QB of the future’ this year because they are trying to duplicate what they did with McNabb and get off the QB treadmill they have been on since 2010:

    2010: Vick, Kolb
    2011: Vick, Young
    2012: Vick, Foles
    2013: Foles, Vick
    2014: Foles, Sanchez
    2015: Bradford, Sanchez

    We joke all the time on here about the Browns but the Eagles have had 6 different QBs start games the last 5 years.

    I lost a bet to him when Vick got signed by Reid when he said Vick was going to be the franchise successor to McNabb.

    Still not buying that any of these particular QBs fit the mold of what they are looking for at #8.

  171. 171 D3FB said at 7:09 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    We’ll certainly be able to get a Luck or Mariotta level QB when we pick 15th next season.

  172. 172 Media Mike said at 7:43 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Granted you’re higher on Goff than most on here. I’d take him at 8 as well, but that ain’t the majority opinion.

  173. 173 Greg Richards said at 9:18 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I think it’s possible they take a QB at 8 but I think they went into the process believing that both Goff and Wentz will be off the board by 8(as I do). They re-signed Bradford before moving up to 13 but they signed Daniel already knowing they had moved up to 8. If you thought you had a legitimate chance of drafting a QB in the 1st round it really doesn’t make sense to invest the money in Daniel. Even if you say well Daniel is the backup that helps you not rush the rookie/2nd year player, then the question is why did you re-sign Bradford. If you don’t at least hope that Bradford can be the guy then why re-sign him at all? You don’t need 2 bridge QBs. Sure, you hedge your bets and give Bradford a short-term deal and have a solid backup QB in place in Daniel in case you decide to move on. You then draft a QB in the 3rd or 4th round. You don’t sign Bradford and Daniel with the intention of drafting a QB in Round 1.

    Now, if Goff or Wentz drop and you didn’t expect them to, then you can justify taking them as BPA with the idea that if Bradford excels this year then you have 3 potential trade pieces in Bradford, Daniel, and the rookie you drafted a year earlier. That’s not the plan though.

  174. 174 Rambo said at 9:38 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Well stated opinion. Makes sense.

  175. 175 Media Mike said at 8:52 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Any “odd” names you all think might be available at 8 that we weren’t thinking would fall?

    I just did a mock where Buckner fell, so I took him.

  176. 176 D3FB said at 11:02 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I think Buckner is the most likely of the guys routinely mocked top 5 to fall. We won’t be taking him.

  177. 177 Aaron said at 8:56 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    gibbs slap comin

  178. 178 Media Mike said at 9:10 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I thought Gibbs’s guys all chop blocked, not slapped?

  179. 179 Dragon_Eagle said at 9:14 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    TOMMY – Serious question. How deep does next year’s QB class look? I don’t follow college much, so I have no idea. Some general guidance here would be appreciated.

    My sense is that when looking at a QB now versus, say an OT, at #8, part of what factors in is how patient are you willing to be for a QB? You can’t bank on having a top 10 pick next year, but if the class is deep your odds are better at getting a good one.

    Personally, I think the need for an OT is really high (not as high as franchise QB), but high enough that unless Pederson falls in love with , I’d rather get the unknown future QB (and Sam Bambi) some real protection and invest in one of the top OTs assuming they fall to #8.

  180. 180 Media Mike said at 9:18 PM on March 29th, 2016:


    You can look this over and draw your own conclusions.

  181. 181 Dragon_Eagle said at 9:20 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I’m too lazy, Mike. Draw some conclusions for me.

  182. 182 TypicalDouche said at 10:32 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    DE without looking at any lists, basically as it stands right now Deshaun Watson is the cream of the crop at QB next year but my prediction is Baker Mayfield will be the 1st QB taken next year. He has all the tools of a prototypical NFL pocket QB.

  183. 183 D3FB said at 10:58 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Baker Mayfield prototypical pocket QB?


  184. 184 Joe Minx said at 11:13 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Yeah, not so much.

  185. 185 D3FB said at 11:17 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    I mean I love Mayfield as a college QB but he’s the epitome of YOLO ball.

  186. 186 Media Mike said at 4:32 AM on March 30th, 2016:

    Spoiled cream. Watson is a running back.

  187. 187 Media Mike said at 4:38 AM on March 30th, 2016:

    Watson is overrated running QB trash. He’ll be damaged goods sooner rather than later.

    I don’t know enough about Kaaya or Falk to tell you much.

    Mayfield has been discussed enough below.

    Chad Kelly is a multiple time felon and a complete bum. I wouldn’t touch him at all.

    I’d agree with D3 that we’re still too far out to really tell

    And a pox on anybody’s house who wants to talk up Greg Ward.

  188. 188 D3FB said at 11:22 PM on March 29th, 2016:

    Depth of next years class won’t be clear until October or so.

  189. 189 steam code generator said at 1:37 PM on April 10th, 2016:

    steam code generator