Eagles vs Bears Monday Nighter

[eaglesnut]

This team looks so much better than I expected it to look. Maybe I'm crazy but I think Wentz has an energy to him that is contagious and has infected the rest of the team.

Truthfully, they would have been doing this with Bradford too. The coaching staff is great. But it sure is nice to know that they are still able to do it with the kid and that the kid can completely handle it.

 

[eaglesnut]

Wentz looked like a seasoned vet out there and his line should have read closer to 300 yards with 2 to 3 TD's than the 190 and 1 TD he ended up with. I'm still pissed about the Matthews drop on that perfect pass which would have been a long TD. Ditto Nelson Agholor and his weak hands ... twice he had very catchable balls (one would have been a TD) and he couldn't hold on to either. The OL also negated 3 completions between 10 and 20 yards ... two due to holding and 1 due to them lining up incorrectly. Despite what happens next week against the Steelers, it's looking like the trade up for Wentz was well worth it. When you can find a true Franchise QB (and it's looking like there's a very good chance of Wentz turning into that eventually) ... then it doesn't matter how many draft picks you traded for him!

That throw to Matthews was so perfect. Unbelievable, but unfortunately very believable, that he dropped it. And it was in the two-minute drill with the Eagles getting the ball back after half.

Yes the trade was worth it. If Wentz struggles mightily for a month after there's some tape on him it was still worth it. Having this staff together at this time, makes it even more the right time to do it. If a kid has poise you can teach him a lot quickly. Poise is one of the hardest things and the kid has it.

 

[Rey]

They were talking about him on ESPN this morning and most are saying that the kid just has that "IT" factor. His poise and command of the offense (Line checks, audibles, etc ...) despite his relative lack of experience at the position (only 1 year in high school, only 24 or so starts at a 1AA college and only 1 half of a pre-season game) is rather amazing.

 

[ill]

Not at all. RG3 got hit straight up. Wentz was spinning and able to just absorb it. It was a blow he could have avoided but it looked worse than it really was.

still, it reminded me of Bob when he first came into the league. Knees worry me and I can see Wentz getting spun around like that and losing one.

 

[Roy Munson]

Truthfully, they would have been doing this with Bradford too. The coaching staff is great. But it sure is nice to know that they are still able to do it with the kid and that the kid can completely handle it.

 

[eaglesnut]

So Bradford was going to be such a negative that we'd lose to these teams even with the great coaching we've gotten? Don't be a fucking moron.

 

[Roy Munson]

So Bradford was going to be such a negative that we'd lose to these teams even with the great coaching we've gotten? Don't be a fucking moron.

The book on Bradford always starts with the same word... IF.

IF he's healthy

IF he can learn the offense

IF IF IF.

Dude was a dud when here. Sure, Chip sucked, but so did Bradford.

One good game in 2 years throwing to WIDE open receivers in MN at home against GBs horrible secondary does not a good QB make.

What will you say next week when they get routed by Carolina?

 

[PhillyGreen]

I do think that Bradford would have been successful but he does not have the mobility of Wentz. Also I think Wentz has better field vision and a higher footbll IQ. I am not sure that Bradford would have picked up the blitzes like Wentz did. Also.....Bradford is a tease and has a phobia of committment.

 

[eaglesnut]

The book on Bradford always starts with the same word... IF.

IF he's healthy

IF he can learn the offense

IF IF IF.

Dude was a dud when here. Sure, Chip sucked, but so did Bradford.

One good game in 2 years throwing to WIDE open receivers in MN at home against GBs horrible secondary does not a good QB make.

What will you say next week when they get routed by Carolina?

They're not going to get routed by Carolina. So I'll say you will have been wrong twice.

 

[eaglesnut]

I do think that Bradford would have been successful but he does not have the mobility of Wentz. Also I think Wentz has better field vision and a higher footbll IQ. I am not sure that Bradford would have picked up the blitzes like Wentz did. Also.....Bradford is a tease and has a phobia of committment.

Bradford would have all the audibling freedom that Wentz has. That held him back last year. Bradford would have Doug calling the plays. That is another thing way better than last year. Bradford would be getting the ball out quicker as well. Bradford moves better in the pocket than Wentz does currently as well, not that Wentz is bad at it, but it'll need work before he gets in that elite range. You can move in the pocket and make plays or run out of the pocket and make plays. Usually moving in the pocket is preferable because it keeps the whole field in play. This game later in the year is going to be a good one. I hope both QBs are healthy for it.

 

[Northern Eagle]

Not at all. RG3 got hit straight up. Wentz was spinning and able to just absorb it. It was a blow he could have avoided but it looked worse than it really was.

Regardless of how well he absorbed it, it's those types of hits when he's near the sideline that he needs to avoid as much possible. Opposing defenses are going to be targeting him to get extra hits, doesn't mean he has to give them the opportunity.

I'm nitpicking - I thoroughly enjoyed last night's game, and watching Wentz operate like a 9 year vet.

 

[Omar 382]

They were talking about him on ESPN this morning and most are saying that the kid just has that "IT" factor. His poise and command of the offense (Line checks, audibles, etc ...) despite his relative lack of experience at the position (only 1 year in high school, only 24 or so starts at a 1AA college and only 1 half of a pre-season game) is rather amazing.

I think the "IT" factor is bullshit

 

[eaglesnut]

I think the "IT" factor is bullshit

It's ok that you're wrong.

 

[Omar 382]

It's ok that you're wrong.

It's ok you're using subjective criteria that can't proven or unproven or measured in any tangible way

 

[Omar 382]

I think Hillary Clinton has the "IT" factor

 

[Omar 382]

Actually, no she doesn't. Gary Johnson now, he has the "IT" factor.

 

[eaglesnut]

It's ok you're using subjective criteria that can't proven or unproven or measured in any tangible way

Yup, pretend everything is measurable. That'll work!

 

[Omar 382]

Yup, pretend everything is measurable. That'll work!

I never said that. I said that saying someone will be successful (he has "IT") because he has something abstract and subjective (he has "IT") is illogical.

 

[Rey]

I think the "IT" factor is bullshit

If you can't see the difference between Wentz in his first 2 starts and what you usually see out of a rookie signal caller in their first couple of starts then I don't know what to tell you. Only rookie QB in history to win first 2 starts with 0 Int's or turnovers; and not just that, but off the jump he's calling his own protections and audibles (dude looks like P Manning out there shouting out instructions and lining everybody up in the right spots) ... and he basically skipped the preseason aside from 1/2 of one game.

 

[Omar 382]

If you can't see the difference between Wentz in his first 2 starts and what you usually see out of a rookie signal caller in their first couple of starts then I don't know what to tell you. Only rookie QB in history to win first 2 starts with 0 Int's or turnovers; and not just that, but off the jump he's calling his own protections and audibles (dude looks like P Manning out there shouting out instructions and lining everybody up in the right spots) ... and he basically skipped the preseason aside from 1/2 of one game.

Yeah, I think he will be a good quarterback. But I think he will be based off 3 TD/ 0 INT, 60.6% completion rate, and a 94.1 QBR, not some bullshit "IT" factor that collectively means nothing to everyone; and something different to anyone