- Thread starter
- #1
Premium
Member
From The Athletic....
"The [Mack Hollins] move also raised questions about a possible disconnect between the coaching staff and front office. It was the fifth time this season the Eagles cut a player who has been a starter or contributor, following the removals of Matthews, Zach Brown, Andrew Sendejo and Akeem Spence."
I don't recall if I ever seen a team cut five players in a season that were contributors before? And in the case of Matthews, Brown and Hollins, were playing nearly every snap just a week earlier!!
Do that Once or twice, and I see good hard nosed leadership from a coach or GM. Do it FIVE times and I start to think that the leadership is the problem. Am I wrong to see this as a huge indicator of a deeper problem with whomever is making these decisions?
There is no good outcome here? If it was a good cut, it indicates it was a bad decision to play them. If its a bad cut, its a bad cut? These sort of moves are normally indicative of lockerroom discord...most likely between coach and player. Again, FIVE times.
It seems unfortunately that we have reached another time when the boss (Lurie) will need to step in, and the decisions that need to be made will likely be to undo something that he did just three years ago that worked well involving some combo of Roseman, Pederson and Schwartz. Hard to believe we are here just three years after a Super Bowl win.
"The [Mack Hollins] move also raised questions about a possible disconnect between the coaching staff and front office. It was the fifth time this season the Eagles cut a player who has been a starter or contributor, following the removals of Matthews, Zach Brown, Andrew Sendejo and Akeem Spence."
I don't recall if I ever seen a team cut five players in a season that were contributors before? And in the case of Matthews, Brown and Hollins, were playing nearly every snap just a week earlier!!
Do that Once or twice, and I see good hard nosed leadership from a coach or GM. Do it FIVE times and I start to think that the leadership is the problem. Am I wrong to see this as a huge indicator of a deeper problem with whomever is making these decisions?
There is no good outcome here? If it was a good cut, it indicates it was a bad decision to play them. If its a bad cut, its a bad cut? These sort of moves are normally indicative of lockerroom discord...most likely between coach and player. Again, FIVE times.
It seems unfortunately that we have reached another time when the boss (Lurie) will need to step in, and the decisions that need to be made will likely be to undo something that he did just three years ago that worked well involving some combo of Roseman, Pederson and Schwartz. Hard to believe we are here just three years after a Super Bowl win.