1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

NFL off-season thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Splendid Splinter, Jan 11, 2021.

  1. Splendid Splinter

    Splendid Splinter Well-Known Member

  2. sgreenwell

    sgreenwell Well-Known Member

    Might seem like a short leash to some, but meh - Pederson hasn't been so impressive since losing Reich, and seeing Wentz go from MVP candidate to DFA candidate should be enough to get any non-winning coach fired. Ripping the band-aid off now seems better than muddling through another 4-12 to 8-8 season with him.
  3. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    So there's a small window in which McCarthy is not the worst coach in the division. Actually, scratch that. I'd prefer the variable.
  4. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    Maybe the decision of week 17 was so toxic that he couldn't stay.
    Not that I don't think Pederson went Broken Arrow on his Sudfeld move. I am sure it was an organizational decision.

    But Pederson is going to take the fall.
  5. sgreenwell

    sgreenwell Well-Known Member

    Even the execution of that was confusing to me. Why play Hurts, a rookie QB, and then bench him for your 27-year-old, third string QB? Either play Hurts the whole game, or Sudfeld the whole game if you want to lose, with some B.S. excuse like "not wanting to risk the health of Hurts in a game that doesn't mean anything." Instead, he did some weird middle ground thing that riled everyone up way more.
  6. da man

    da man Well-Known Member

    I guess the idea was something along the lines of, "Well, we've had a couple of games to get a look at Hurts to see if he could be the future, and we want to get him as many snaps as we can. But we want to get Sudfeld out there for a quarter to see whether he's worth keeping around as a backup or if we're in the market for a solid No. 2." And to the Eagles that game meant zero, so whoever made the decision must have figured why not?
  7. HappyCurmudgeon

    HappyCurmudgeon Well-Known Member

    End of the day I think Wentz's problems had more to do with Wentz than Pederson. If the fact of him not endearing himself to teammates is close to true I doubt him being painted as the "owner's boy" will help.

    That being said Pederson pissed off his locker room in Week 17 and that was a mistake that would be hard to overcome.
  8. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    Hasn’t Sudfeld been on the roster for like three years? I’d say the Eagles were pretty well acquainted with what a shitty player he is. Hurts was keeping the game too close and they wanted to ensure the loss, plain and simple.
    sgreenwell likes this.
  9. Tighthead

    Tighthead Well-Known Member

    Is Pederson an appealing HC candidate or is the bloom off the rose? It really seemed to unravel in a hurry in Philly.
  10. HappyCurmudgeon

    HappyCurmudgeon Well-Known Member

    I don't feel like he'll be waiting long for the next opportunity.
  11. Sam Mills 51

    Sam Mills 51 Well-Known Member

    I'd take him. He won a Lombardi Trophy and he did so against the Patriots. Who besides Tom Coughlin can say that over the last 20 years?

    IMO, he projects well - aside from the Sudfeld fallout - and he has proven he can get it done.

    For Jeff Lurie to make Doug Pederson pay with his job while Howie Roseman keeps his is puzzling. Do you think Pederson pushed to draft Jalen Hurts? And don't we all know that the Eagles could have used help elsewhere on the roster when Roseman decided on Hurts in the draft?
  12. goalmouth

    goalmouth Well-Known Member

Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page