Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Is Desean Jackson a luxury we canít afford?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Philadelphia Eagles
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Is Desean Jackson a luxury we can't afford?
Yes
21%
 21%  [ 3 ]
No
78%
 78%  [ 11 ]
Total Votes : 14

Author Message
PowerElite


Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 8808
PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 7:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

marky_b27 wrote:
Rock_#5 wrote:
I dont blame Marky for asking the question, he was just trying to see if we can improve our team in the long run.

I dont think cutting Jackson would help us, He's a damn good player and he has earned his spot as a solid starter. In his five seasons with the team. He is on pace to have 5,000 receiving yards.



Who said anything about cutting him? I want to cash in this chip and get me some draft picks.


I don't think he has much value considering that he now has a starter's salary.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BLick12


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 25331
Location: South Jeezy fo sheezy
PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

marky_b27 wrote:
BBIB wrote:
marky_b27 wrote:


The problem is the QB and the offensive line.

No point having all pros at receiver if you QB is too incompetent to get the ball to them.


How can you even properly evaluate a QB if his offensive line is garbage???

Again look at high powered offenses throughout the history especially in the playoffs when they faced dominant front from another team. You see it in college and NFL ranks of those high powered offenses that get shut down

THose skill players are negated, that QB who may play well all year is negated because they don't have time to get the ball to those skill players.

That's what the Eagles basically face EVERY game. Vick is basically the only QB in the league who can still make that Eagles team competitive despite that adversity


See the first game, where Vick threw, what was it? 4 interceptions


Sure, Vick threw some horrible passes and made some bad reads. But when your HC/OC are running play action pass 40 times a game and running the ball 10 times it puts the QB in a pretty bad situation. Watch the Cleveland game again, I dare you (it's torture) but the Browns LBs are just bolting back into the passing lanes each play while the Eagles are running play action. They were BEGGING the Eagles to run the football and they refused to do it. Despite Lesean McCoy averaging 5.5 YPC they still threw the ball 60+ times. That is sickening.
_________________
johndeere1707 wrote:

Another Ginger QB in the AFC North.

Looking forward to the "No Soul Bowl" twice a year
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
killdawabbit


Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 5587
Location: Somewhere you're not.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Meco wrote:
killdawabbit wrote:
I happen to have several comments in this thread. Please point out to me which were not reasoned.


Alright. Laughing

eaglefan#1 wrote:
DeSean Jackson is soft and overrated. Same as Maclin.

willy_law wrote:
Jackson isn't a true #1 but we require him to act like one, get a WR that is bigger or a true #1 and I think you will see Jackson play better

Ryan Swope.

Phire wrote:
We can't afford to have both Jackson and Maclin.

Trade Maclin and get someone else. Start Cooper across Jackson until we do.

Hockey5djh wrote:
DeSean is a great weapon, #1 receiver he is not. DeSean is SEVERLY underutilized in the return game by Andy Reid. I think that putting Damaris Johnson back there instead of Jackson for returns is dumb considering Jackson made his probowls/money in the return game, not necessarily as a WR.

I compare Jackson to Josh Cribbs, Devin Hester, and Dante Hall. All above average return men but when put at WR they are considered below average. DeSean excels at go routes (speed) and end arounds (speed) and has that X factor quality but as a #1 WR I don't think he cuts the cheese.

We need someone that is capable of drawing the double team with the size and skill to be a true #1 for DeSean's one-trick pony style of play to work.

BLick12 wrote:
Just cut him, he sucks.

BLick12 wrote:

No, the problem is he doesn't get open against a decent cornerback. He is virtually useless in any jump ball scenario and doesn't fight back for anything. Dwayne Bowe disappears because he has Matt Cassel and Brady Quinn as his QBs and no other receivers to help him out. Dwayne Bowe is like a TO lite, McNabb would've killed it with him and he gives great effort after he makes the catch. I would trade both Maclin and Jackson straight up for Bowe.

marky_b27 wrote:
It's not about the money, it's about the fact that a cynic could call him a gimmick.

marky_b27 wrote:

Eddie Royal can go over the middle.

Jackson has a sick note preventing him

Laughing


Done.


Funny. I don't see a single one that starts with "killdawabbit wrote"...
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheKingDP


Joined: 03 Nov 2010
Posts: 562
Location: illadelph
PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Summary:
The way Desean Jackson's contract is structured, he isn't going anywhere until 2014 or 2015.


Details:
If you don't understand NFL contracts at all, don't even bother reading this part..


Jackson signed a $10 million dollar signing bonus in 2012. The cap hit for that $10 million dollars gets spread over the life of the deal (aka "pro-rated") or the first 5 years of a deal, whichever occurs first. The "Dead Money" pro-ration of Jackson's contract is as follows:

2012: $10 million
2013: $8 million
2014: $6 million
2015: $4 million
2016: $2 million

What this means, is if Desean Jackson gets traded\cut after June 1, 2013, we would have to absorb the entire $8 million dollars as "dead cap space" in 2013. If Jackson gets traded after June 1, 2014, we would only have to absorb $6 million dollars of "dead cap space" in 2014.

The "$47 million" part of his contract is paid in base salary. He also has a "work-out bonus" of $250k a year. Here's how that equates to his "cap number" each season

2012: $750k base salary + $250k work-out bonus + $2 million signing bonus pro-ration = $3 million
2013: $6.75 million base salary + $250k work-out bonus + $2 million signing bonus pro-ration = $9 million
2014: $10.25 million base salary + $250k work-out bonus + $2 million signing bonus pro-ration = $12.5 million
2015: $9.75 million base salary + $250k work-out bonus + $2 million signing bonus pro-ration = $10.25 million
2016: $8.25 million base salary + $250k work-out bonus + $2 million signing bonus pro-ration = $10.5 million

It doesn't make fiscal sense to cut\trade Desean Jackson until his cap figure is significantly higher than his "dead money" figure (2014).

In 2013, we would only create $1 million dollars of "cap space" while taking a "cap hit" of $8 million dollars. ($9m cap hit - $8m dead money = $1m cap space gain

In 2014, we would create $6.5 million dollars of "cap space" while taking a "cap hit" of $6 million dollars ($12.5m cap hit - $6m dead money = $6.5m cap space gain)

In 2015, we would create $6.5 million dollars of "cap space" while taking a "cap hit" of $4 million dollars ($10.5m cap hit - $4m dead money = $6.5m cap space gain)

And so on and so forth. If this makes 1 person understand an NFL contract, then this was worth it. Unfortunately (and more likely), I think I might have just confused a whole lot of people.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Meco


Joined: 30 Aug 2012
Posts: 2574
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 5:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Taken out of context, Phire? Sure but do those arguments not apply to this as well?

The Eagles are 3-7. They were 8-8 last year. Things aren't good but you can't just go around blaming everyone on the team and throwing them under the bus. In the grand scheme of things, DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin are the least of our problems. Are they the cause of our inefficient passing game? Hell. No. We've got one of the worst QB situations in the NFL and our offensive line is in shambles. Replacing Maclin and DeSean is like replacing hood ornaments on your car because your engine isn't working, your focus is in the wrong spot.

The idea that Maclin and Jackson can't coexist or be an effective receiving duo is nonsensical, nothing more than rhetoric and convoluted ranting from a disenfranchised fan base. It's borderline comical.

For three years ('09-'11) the Eagles were a top 10 passing offense with Jeremy Maclin and DeSean Jackson as the primary options. They've proven over a three year period that they are a perfectly viable receiving combination.

And this sort of stereotypical receiving duo that you all are putting forth isn't based in reality, it's purely theoretical. It's white noise. Talk. Zero real life value.

"We need a big, hulking wide receiver to compliment DeSean! This is a cold hard fact! Prove me wrong!"

Okay, I'll prove you wrong rather easily. This is not basketball, your receivers don't play off of one another nearly as much as many of you seem to think. The goal of a receiver is to win on the outside and win one on one match-ups and in the end, it doesn't really matter how it's done (finesse or physical) except for in theory. And both DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin have both proven over the course of the past 4 seasons that they're both able to win one on one match-ups.

So, even if they were exact clones of each other it really wouldn't matter. Notice the word "if" in that sentence because I did not say they're too alike and that is because they aren't. Jeremy Maclin is two inches taller than DeSean Jackson, twenty pounds heavier and he's nearly two tenths of a second slower. They're not alike. 40% of DeSean Jackson's targets in 2011 were of the "deep" or "bomb" variety, contrast that with Jeremy Maclin whose deep passes accounted for 30% of his targets. And this season, 32.4% of DeSean's targets are over twenty yards (7th) while Jeremy Maclin's targets over twenty yards only account for 17.7% of his targets (47th). Oh and Jeremy Maclin has thrice registered a catch rate higher than 63.3% for an entire season, DeSean Jackson has not accomplished that once. They're not even terribly similar, DeSean Jackson is a speed demon wide receiver who excels on deep routes while Jeremy Maclin is a receiver who is fast enough to keep a corner honest but relies mostly on precise route running and separation in tight areas. The only thing they have in common is that neither is a bruiser after the catch (and that appears to be the only thing you're all capable of taking in).

And while I'm on my soapbox here (discounted thanks to Black Friday, yipee!), B60 has lost his mind if he's going to go around and tell people that DeSean Jackson stepping out of bounds to avoid a big hit in a blowout loss somehow encapsulates his entire career and tarnishes his record. Literally every single receiver in the league ducks out of bounds and I've seen a vast majority of running backs do it too at one point or another. Does DeSean do it more often? Sure but that's part of the deal when you're 5'9" and 170 pounds and it's hardly some career defining, reputation tarnishing, irreparable black mark on his record. The fact that you're harping on something so tacky and meaningless is kind of a bad look bro.

And for all of you who think championship rings are won with king sized receivers:
2011: 6', 5'11" and 5'11". Those are the heights of Hakeem Nicks, Mario Manningham and Victor Cruz.
2010: 5'11", 6', 6' and 6'2". Those are the heights of Greg Jennings, Donald Driver, James Jones and Jordy Nelson
2009: 6'4", 5'11", 5'9" and 6'2". Those are the heights of Marques Colston, Devery Henderson, Lance Moore and Robert Meachem
2008: 5'10", 6' and 6'. Those are the heights of Santonio Holmes, Hines Ward and Nate Washington.
2007: 6'5", 6'3" and 5'9". Those are the heights of Plaxico Burress, Amani Toomer and Sinorice Moss.
2006: 5'11" and 6'. The heights of Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne.

And you can keep looking down the line for yourselves. The size of your receivers has absolutely no correlation to the winning of superbowls.

PS - Phire, remember all those times you were arguing in favor of our skill position players? All those pictures and tweets from experts that I showed you and things you posted showing and telling us that our players were getting open? Remember those. Yeah, me too. So yeah, I'd blame QB regression more than I'd blame WR regression but lets call that a hunch.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phire


Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 48555
Location: #championchip #2012BirdsHoF #2012GoldStnd #YAKtoseIntolerant #Merica #TrollyRangers #Danes #BirdGang
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Meco, your whole quip here can be settled by making a few simple clarifications.

1. I will defend Maclin's production and effectiveness under the proper conditions. I don't think he's as bad as Eagles fans make him out to be.
2. With the above being said, it is not of my belief that the Eagles can't improve at wide receiver. The whole Hakeem Nicks/Jeremy Maclin debate was under the concession that Hakeem Nicks was a better receiver than Jeremy Maclin. I am for the advancement of this team. If we can improve at WR, then I want it to be done. I believe Jeremy to be a decent receiver but I'd like to see a great receiver wearing an Eagles jersey if we can get it done.
3. With the second point being said, Jackson having signed a contract, signing Maclin too would give us our two starting wide outs. Since I am of the belief that we can improve at WR, then I don't feel we should lock ourselves to being stuck with two receivers, neither of whom are great.
4. Never did I say Maclin and Jackson couldn't co-exist. I said it's counterproductive to do so, and I stand by that. If we can maximize the WR position at Maclin's expense, then I'm for that. And I'm a Maclin fan.

I am also of the camp who believes Dominique Rogers-Cromartie to be an excellent young cornerback, but I don't want the Eagles to re-sign him.

It is because I am of the camp who does not mind watching this team bottom feed for a few years and arising from those ashes, not clinging to life on bandages and aspirin, which is what this team is now.

Meco wrote:
Taken out of context, Phire? Sure but do those arguments not apply to this as well?

The Eagles are 3-7. They were 8-8 last year. Things aren't good but you can't just go around blaming everyone on the team and throwing them under the bus. In the grand scheme of things, DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin are the least of our problems. Are they the cause of our inefficient passing game? Hell. No. We've got one of the worst QB situations in the NFL and our offensive line is in shambles. Replacing Maclin and DeSean is like replacing hood ornaments on your car because your engine isn't working, your focus is in the wrong spot.


And I've made that argument before. The reality is just that: the Eagles are 3-7 and probably won't finish 8-8. The team has some serious gut checking to do, and will probably have to let go of some quality players. A few weeks ago I still had hope for this team. Now it is lost. I have acquired the spirit of rebuilding and I want to see this team maximized. Jackson and Maclin might be the hood ornaments, but if the hood ornaments aren't exactly what you expected and you've got the resources to replace your engine and those ornaments? Then sure, why the hell not. Get a new engine, and get some better hood ornaments while you're in the shop.

Quote:
The idea that Maclin and Jackson can't coexist or be an effective receiving duo is nonsensical, nothing more than rhetoric and convoluted ranting from a disenfranchised fan base. It's borderline comical.


Maybe it's all that turkey, but I highly doubt you're reading most of these threads. When you came into this thread with arms swinging I almost thought you were drunk. When Wabbit explicitly asked you to find his quotes that were being labeled "not reasoned" you came up with 15 other posters.

So are you really reading?

Because where did I say they couldn't coexist? They aren't maximized by being on the same field. That is a sentiment I've held for a long time. These guys were being criticized even with McNabb, Kolb, Vick--whomever.

Players peak and they hit slumps. As I brought up as an example, do we take L.J. Smith's best year as an Eagle as to define him as a player? Is Celek as good as his best year, or bad as his worst?

The truth is always somewhere in between. Jackson and Maclin have had good years but not enough of it, and for not long enough. Attribute it to bad QB play? Yes, there is evidence of this. Attribute it to bad OL play? Yes, there is evidence of this.

But for all the bad QB play and bad OL play, there are still plays to be made. The OL blocks sometimes, and even Vick has made good throws sometimes.

The evidence is there. When there are plays to be made, neither Jackson nor Maclin have done much damage. Therefore I think we can improve there. I think even having Dwayne Bowe in the place of Maclin this year would have helped out our offense. If you threaten in the secondary, it takes less pressure up front. Part of the reason why teams are blitzing with reckless abandon is because they know our receivers don't pose any threat. They certainly won't make them pay.

Quote:
For three years ('09-'11) the Eagles were a top 10 passing offense with Jeremy Maclin and DeSean Jackson as the primary options. They've proven over a three year period that they are a perfectly viable receiving combination.


But why does that mean I can't hope for better?

Quote:
And this sort of stereotypical receiving duo that you all are putting forth isn't based in reality, it's purely theoretical. It's white noise. Talk. Zero real life value.


Stereotypical receiving duo? I'm all for having great players on our team. As many as possible. I see Maclin and Jackson as... effective, sure. Good guys, sure. But great? No. I can't call them great. Having an elite receiver will give them favorable match-ups. How is this just talk?

Let's break it down logically:
Jackson is a decent receiver.
Maclin is a decent receiver.
There are better receivers in the league.
Therefore, both Jackson and Maclin can be upgraded.

How is this so difficult?

Quote:
"We need a big, hulking wide receiver to compliment DeSean! This is a cold hard fact! Prove me wrong!"

Okay, I'll prove you wrong rather easily. This is not basketball, your receivers don't play off of one another nearly as much as many of you seem to think. The goal of a receiver is to win on the outside and win one on one match-ups and in the end, it doesn't really matter how it's done (finesse or physical) except for in theory. And both DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin have both proven over the course of the past 4 seasons that they're both able to win one on one match-ups.


...between the 20's. Even this year's offense has no problem moving the ball between the 20's. When we get into the red zone, where do Maclin and Jackson go? They are severely limited in the red zone and honestly I'm shocked and appalled that you even possess the audacity to make these assertions.

In the red zone, more often that not, it's about physicality, size, and jumping. Were you not in shock and awe that the Eagles actually ran a fade route? What does our reaction tell us? That the Eagles don't run fade routes very often.

What does that say about our starting receivers? Because it wasn't Jackson or Maclin who was given the fade route. And I'm going to guess we won't see either get any this year.

It's because they are limited by their physical attributes in tight spaces. They need space to operate. They can beat 1 on 1 match ups, when they have room to run and reach their top speed.

Not things that are necessarily helpful inside the 20. Just ask Riley Cooper.

[quote]So, even if they were exact clones of each other it really wouldn't matter. Notice the word "if" in that sentence because I did not say they're too alike and that is because they aren't. Jeremy Maclin is two inches taller than DeSean Jackson, twenty pounds heavier and he's nearly two tenths of a second slower. They're not alike.[quote]

They're alike in their limitations, which is what we're focusing on here. Neither can break tackles. Neither fight for toss up balls. Neither can go across the middle and take a hit.

And most daunting of all, neither are all that effective in the red zone, as we've seen even this year when we can move the ball down the field, bad QB or OL granted.

Quote:
40% of DeSean Jackson's targets in 2011 were of the "deep" or "bomb" variety, contrast that with Jeremy Maclin whose deep passes accounted for 30% of his targets. And this season, 32.4% of DeSean's targets are over twenty yards (7th) while Jeremy Maclin's targets over twenty yards only account for 17.7% of his targets (47th). Oh and Jeremy Maclin has thrice registered a catch rate higher than 63.3% for an entire season, DeSean Jackson has not accomplished that once.


They could be used differently, sure. They have different strengths. But they're not different enough. And you could have two Desean Jacksons or two Jeremy Maclins on the same team and their stats over the course of a season would be different.

Such statistical analysis is to be taken with skepticism.

Quote:
They're not even terribly similar, DeSean Jackson is a speed demon wide receiver who excels on deep routes while Jeremy Maclin is a receiver who is fast enough to keep a corner honest but relies mostly on precise route running and separation in tight areas. The only thing they have in common is that neither is a bruiser after the catch (and that appears to be the only thing you're all capable of taking in).


Neither are great. I'm in favor of upgrading the position from two decent guys to one decent guy and one great guy. Why is that so sacrilege?

Quote:
And for all of you who think championship rings are won with king sized receivers:
2011: 6', 5'11" and 5'11". Those are the heights of Hakeem Nicks, Mario Manningham and Victor Cruz.
2010: 5'11", 6', 6' and 6'2". Those are the heights of Greg Jennings, Donald Driver, James Jones and Jordy Nelson
2009: 6'4", 5'11", 5'9" and 6'2". Those are the heights of Marques Colston, Devery Henderson, Lance Moore and Robert Meachem
2008: 5'10", 6' and 6'. Those are the heights of Santonio Holmes, Hines Ward and Nate Washington.
2007: 6'5", 6'3" and 5'9". Those are the heights of Plaxico Burress, Amani Toomer and Sinorice Moss.
2006: 5'11" and 6'. The heights of Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne.


It's not the size dude, it's how you use it.
They might be of comparable size but:
Hakeem Nicks and Victor Cruz are better than what we have.
Donald Driver, Greg Jennings, James Jones and Jordy Nelson is a better corps than we have.
Marques Colston, Devery Henderson, Lance Moore, and Robert Meachem is a better corps than we have.
Santonio Holmes and Hines Ward were better than what we have.
Plaxico Burress was better than the guys we have.
Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne were both better than the guys we have.

It's the simple fact that there are plenty of players in the league who play WR that are the same size and yet just simply better players that gives me hope and reason to want to upgrade the position.

Just because you are a fan of Maclin and Jackson, why does it preclude you from upgrading the position? I think both guys can be effective, both guys can produce, but neither guys will ever dominate.

Neither Jackson nor Maclin, whether it be McNabb, Kolb, Vick, or Foles--makes plays for their quarterback. Not the way just about every guy you listed before with comparable sizes have.

Quote:
And you can keep looking down the line for yourselves. The size of your receivers has absolutely no correlation to the winning of superbowls.


You're right, it doesn't. Instead, dominant receivers who beat defenders in more ways than one and make plays do. Champions. Not Maclin or Jackson.

Quote:
PS - Phire, remember all those times you were arguing in favor of our skill position players? All those pictures and tweets from experts that I showed you and things you posted showing and telling us that our players were getting open? Remember those. Yeah, me too. So yeah, I'd blame QB regression more than I'd blame WR regression but lets call that a hunch.


Your inability to acknowledge that there could be more than one moving part at a time is severely limiting your logical cohesion in these arguments.

One can defend a player and simultaneously believe the player can be upgraded.
One can acknowledge QB regression and simultaneously expect more of his WRs.

The simple matter of the fact is that if the Eagles are going to rebuild, then why cut ourselves short? Upgrade everywhere we can. If we have an opportunity to start from scratch, why shackle ourselves to Jackson and Maclin? Why not Jackson and Bowe? Why not Jackson and whomever is the next big thing at WR?

I am for improving the Philadelphia Eagles. I don't see our receivers to be great players. Therefore I believe we can improve the WR position which will subsequently improve the Philadelphia Eagles.

Try to wrap your head around that one, I dare you, but don't hurt yourself.
_________________

theuntouchable wrote:
Think about this phire. I am the real chow.

RainbowCarebear wrote:
Only for the quick and lucky.

Danish proverb 3:69
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky_b27


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 21239
Location: Nottingham, England
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like Phire's war and peace length posts, now it's time to read it.

Confused
_________________



RainbowCarebear wrote:
Marky > Foles
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky_b27


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 21239
Location: Nottingham, England
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

On the Jackson/Maclin thing - both of them play either at or under their size. We don't need a Megatron style receiver, we could easily have a receiver is Maclin's size, but isn't afraid to contest the ball. I think that's the issue with the entire team, they are too finesse and are afraid of getting their hands dirty.
_________________



RainbowCarebear wrote:
Marky > Foles
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RandyMossIsBoss


Joined: 01 Jun 2012
Posts: 17833
Location: Can't talk
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Our forum is falling apart! Once a band of jort loving Philadelphian brothers, now a mess of grumpy drunken jort loving PE clones. We cannot let our franchises incompetence turn this forum into constant bickering and hatred. We must remain optimistic that whatever this team ends up doing, will be the right move(s), nothing else we can do but hope.




_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky_b27


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 21239
Location: Nottingham, England
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I believe that second picture is from the Eagles Forum Mods Labor Day BBQ
_________________



RainbowCarebear wrote:
Marky > Foles
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kiltman


Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 14673
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yea guys...it wasn't too long ago we were the most wonder outs brotherhood humanity had ever seen...wha happened?





I agree with Phire that while Jackson/Maclin have been solid.... we can definitely improve.



marky_b27 wrote:
I believe that second picture is from the Eagles Forum Mods Labor Day BBQ


Nabbs, Phire, 808, Gothman

Steegles taking the pic


Phreak was invited but didn't show up
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oland11


Joined: 15 Jul 2011
Posts: 7689
Location: "This game is over!" - Chuck Bednarik
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kiltman wrote:
marky_b27 wrote:
I believe that second picture is from the Eagles Forum Mods Labor Day BBQ


Nabbs, Phire, 808, Gothman

Steegles taking the pic


Phreak was invited but didn't show up


I thought Nabbs and 808 were older than that....
_________________
NCAA Division III WLAX Event Supervisor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky_b27


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 21239
Location: Nottingham, England
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 3:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oland11 wrote:
Kiltman wrote:
marky_b27 wrote:
I believe that second picture is from the Eagles Forum Mods Labor Day BBQ


Nabbs, Phire, 808, Gothman

Steegles taking the pic


Phreak was invited but didn't show up


I thought Nabbs and 808 were older than that....


Nabbs has aged well.
_________________



RainbowCarebear wrote:
Marky > Foles
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oland11


Joined: 15 Jul 2011
Posts: 7689
Location: "This game is over!" - Chuck Bednarik
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

marky_b27 wrote:
oland11 wrote:
Kiltman wrote:
marky_b27 wrote:
I believe that second picture is from the Eagles Forum Mods Labor Day BBQ


Nabbs, Phire, 808, Gothman

Steegles taking the pic


Phreak was invited but didn't show up


I thought Nabbs and 808 were older than that....


Nabbs has aged well.


Where was this BBQ? I want to attend next year.... xD

And when I said Nabbs and 808 were older I thought that meant 30-40s...
_________________
NCAA Division III WLAX Event Supervisor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hockey5djh


Joined: 08 Feb 2008
Posts: 16250
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

marky_b27 wrote:
On the Jackson/Maclin thing - both of them play either at or under their size. We don't need a Megatron style receiver, we could easily have a receiver is Maclin's size, but isn't afraid to contest the ball. I think that's the issue with the entire team, they are too finesse and are afraid of getting their hands dirty.


While I admit calling Jackson below average might hurt some feelings around here I believe he is below average as a complete WR but he does excel in certain areas, the deep route for example.

I think Marky hit the nail on the head when he points out contesting the ball. My Hakeem Nicks, and subsequent Justin Blackmon boners were caused by watching a WR fight for a football thrown in his general direction and also their ability to take a hit and hang onto the ball. They make the tough plays. I don't think you can point out one of our WRs and say they can go out and make a tough play.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Philadelphia Eagles All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 7 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group