Eagles not likely to resign Stallworth

[brad7686]

I don't have a link but i saw it on rotoworld. And it said they don't plan on bringing in anybody else

Man, that is cheap and stupid. It's really good news for the rest of the division that the eagles want to sit back and not give mcnabb anything to throw at. If a team were to mix the eagles scouting with the skins willingness to spend money, look out.

[fredp45]

It's great news that they won't get more WR talent. The one year they had a good WR (Owens) they went to the Super Bowl. Their lack of WR talent will hurt them. When NFL DBs don't worry about your WR's, they get single covered and then it get's harder to run the ball.

You must have at least one WR who gets doubled.

By the way -- it hurt to say that Owens is a good WR, but I can't deny his talent, just everything else about him is horrible!

[1niksder]

I don't have a link but i saw it on rotoworld.

Donte' Stallworth isn't expected to be re-signed by the Eagles.

General manager Tom Heckert has said he's willing to go with a four-receiver rotation involving Reggie Brown, Hank Baskett, Jason Avant, and Greg Lewis. Brown would likely be Donovan McNabb's top receiver. Baskett and Avant might have the best chances to start opposite him

Rotoworld

[PulpExposure]

That's retarded of them. It was clear that Stallworth's speed brought a hell of a lot to the Eagles.

Man, they're stupid in so many ways. Smart in so many ways, and stupid in equally many.

Build one hell of a big, excellent offensive line. Check.
Yet, why run the ball with that roadgrading line? Ah don't bother to draft a big running back. Ooops.

Sheesh.

[gay4pacman]

yeah they had a chance at jackson.....whoops.

stallworth is their big threat i would love to see him go.

[SkinsFreak]

What a stupid move. Besides Westbrook, Stallworth was one of their best offensive players last year.

[Redskin in Canada]

Hey guys ...

Have we learned something about them over the last few years?

What does this mean? That they are not going to do -anything- ???

Do you really believe that? Give me a break! That means that the guy may have been good but it might become too expensive or was not a good fit in the locker room. It might also be a tactic to humble him and bring him down in price.

Of course they will bring somebody else as good or better from the draft or free agency !!! And of course they will not advertise their plans o you and the entire league!

Ever since JK Cooke sold the team, the Eagles have spent two thirds of what we have and have gotten twice as good results from every investment they have made. We are, I regret ta admit, the perfect example of how not to work in free agency. By "we" I mean Dan Snyder and Vinny Cerrato of course!

How long ago has it been since the Eagles won the NFC East? How long ago since the Redskins won it? I hope that you take things into better perspective.

[Fios]

I agree with your general point RiC but I also think that the Eagles reluctance to cut a big check for a wide out has cost them a Super Bowl. And I'm not playing the role of outside observer, some of the most knowledgeable Eagles fans I know agree on this point. McNabb has a certain window (especially given his injury history) and you have to maximize his value. Yes, the TO signing turned out badly (partially because the Eagles mishandled the situation, something conveniently omitted when that is discussed) but it is incomprehensible to me that the Eagles haven't secured a top-flight receiver.

[Mursilis]

I agree with your general point RiC but I also think that the Eagles reluctance to cut a big check for a wide out has cost them a Super Bowl. And I'm not playing the role of outside observer, some of the most knowledgeable Eagles fans I know agree on this point. McNabb has a certain window (especially given his injury history) and you have to maximize his value. Yes, the TO signing turned out badly (partially because the Eagles mishandled the situation, something conveniently omitted when that is discussed) but it is incomprehensible to me that the Eagles haven't secured a top-flight receiver.

It's even more incomprehensible to me that they haven't secured a top-flight running back. Westbrook is good, but he's more a Reggie Bush-type - an excellent pass-catching RB who can exploit coverage mismatches for big gains, but not an every-down RB who can chew the clock and carry the load. There's just no way I'd trust Westbrook to be a 25+ carry RB for a full season. More than anything else on that offense, they need a premier RB.

[Irn-Bru]

I agree with your general point RiC but I also think that the Eagles reluctance to cut a big check for a wide out has cost them a Super Bowl. And I'm not playing the role of outside observer, some of the most knowledgeable Eagles fans I know agree on this point. McNabb has a certain window (especially given his injury history) and you have to maximize his value. Yes, the TO signing turned out badly (partially because the Eagles mishandled the situation, something conveniently omitted when that is discussed) but it is incomprehensible to me that the Eagles haven't secured a top-flight receiver.

In addition: think the Patiots could have used Deion Branch instead of Reche Caldwell in that championship game?

The Eagles and the Patriots, probably the two toughest FO's in the NFL, have definitely created more success than failure by examining re-signings very seriously and letting players go often. They are among the least star-packed teams in the league because of it, but that (obviously) doesn't matter because of their W-L record. However, it can also lead to some mistakes.

In my opinion the Eagles have vastly overestimated their abilities to make up for personnel on offense through playcalling and strategy (as well as the arm of Donovan McNabb). They treated the Westbrook signing as if it was hard-earned, well deserved cash for their star RB. The only problem is that I don't think Westbrook really gives them what they need at the RB positions (especially, as someone has already pointed out, given how dominating their offensive line can be). At some point, after all, another team will simply outmatch your players, or that QB will have a bad game.

The Patriots have been amazingly prescient in their FA choices and draft selections, but even they seem to have suffered -- to an extent -- from too tough of a re-signing policy. Then again, they have a 1st this year because of Branch, so perhaps by this time next year no one will care that they missed this year's Superbowl by 5 points.

[Chris Luva Luva]

The eagles need to adopt the Saints offense or at least a variation. They need a RB who can run between the tackles and have WB in the backfield at the same time. Just like Deuce and Reggie. The Eagles lack of a punishing RB who can grind the tuff yards costed them the superbowl.

Hey guys ...

Have we learned something about them over the last few years?

What does this mean? That they are not going to do -anything- ???

Do you really believe that? Give me a break! That means that the guy may have been good but it might become too expensive or was not a good fit in the locker room. It might also be a tactic to humble him and bring him down in price.

Of course they will bring somebody else as good or better from the draft or free agency !!! And of course they will not advertise their plans o you and the entire league!

Ever since JK Cooke sold the team, the Eagles have spent two thirds of what we have and have gotten twice as good results from every investment they have made. We are, I regret ta admit, the perfect example of how not to work in free agency. By "we" I mean Dan Snyder and Vinny Cerrato of course!

How long ago has it been since the Eagles won the NFC East? How long ago since the Redskins won it? I hope that you take things into better perspective.

I agree, even though they haven't won the big one, at least they get to enjoy their regular seasons. At least their fans get some sense of hope each season.

[Redskin in Canada]

I agree with your general point RiC but I also think that the Eagles reluctance to cut a big check for a wide out has cost them a Super Bowl...

The Eagles and Pats on one side, and the Redskins on the other are located at the far opposite ends of the spectrum of draft and free agency policy. Nameless to say which has been more successful in recent years.

The advantage of the JK Cooke approach was that he was able to recognise when spending smart money was wise, and when it was not. Dan Snyder and Vinny Cerrato would have been kicked out the door years ago under the JK Cooke ownership days. If anybody wishes to say that the approach by these two teams has cost them, how about the Redskins and the approach by Dan and Vinny?

Let me ask a few truly -embarrassing- questions as a Redskins fan:

What is worse, letting Stallworth go or signing Adam Archuleta?

If given a choice, would you have let Brian Mitchell go and hired Dion Sanders?

Would you have let Antonio Pierce go?

Do you want me to go on? Please guys do not make write a long list of super expensive fiascos created by this owner.

Dan Snyder is a GREAT MARKETING AND MONEY MAKING GUY. Who else in this league, or any sports in any league in the world for that matter, makes the kind of money that he makes out of the miserable Redskins fans the way he does with such an ABYSMAL RECORD to show for?

Redskins fans are the best fans in the world. Joe Gibbs is right! Who else would put up with this owner and Vinny?

Ah! But I do not underestimate their ability to spin things around. They are great marketing guys. Somehow, every offseason something worth of marketing visibility is done fool the fans and we fall for it, EVERY SINGLE TIME.

Sure the Front Office approach by the Pats and Eagles has cost them. Their approach is not perfect. In fact, I would argue that the Redskins approach during JK Cooke days was even better. There was loyalty and there was a "culture" of accountability both personally and as a team. Compare any of those Front Office approaches against the Snyder/Cerrato DISGRACE and please tell me which one is PREFERABLE.

The beauty of the approach by the Eagles and Pats, and even more so during the JK Cooke days, is that a player WANTS to go and play to that team because he wants to make decent money but most importantly because he WANTS TO WIN. Players come here to fill their pockets with money, often at the end of their careers as retirement insurance policy.

Please do not make me put more salt in our wounds. Our Front Office approach, together with the Scouting group, have done very little for this team for quite a while.

[PulpExposure]

For once, RiC, realize that my post was not about the Redskins at all. I wasn't comparing the Redskins "approach" to getting/retaining talent, or the Redskins "scouting" methods to how the Eagles do it.

"" Because I'm not sure there is an approach or scouting...

I'm saying the Eagles have a very smart organization. But they are always chronically under the cap because they're good at signing young players to long contracts, and dumping aging vets.

But...they're also not using the strengths of their team very well.

Andy Reid is the most pass-happy coach in NFL history. That's crazy; his run/pass ratio is off more than Wayne Fontes' Run and Shoot.

Yet he's taken the time to draft this huge offensive line, one that run blocks very well. One reason the Eagles started winning with Jeff Garcia, is they went to a more 50/50 balance of run/pass and let that offensive line road grade.

But instead of drafting a RB that will let you run him 20-25 times a game, he's stuck with Bryan Westbrook (injury history) and Corell Buckhalter (major injury history).

To me, even more than a WR, it seems the Eagles need a big, bruising runningback to run out the clock with. Yet they haven't had one for years...and they never draft one.

Same with wide receiver; when they get a playmaker, their passing game literally ignites (see Owens in 2004 or Stallworth in 2005). And they know their passing game suffers mightily when left to Reggie Brown and the other scrubs (see 2005, and 2003, 2002, 2001).

If they have cap room...why not spend it? It's not like you save it. Spend a little for a wide out who's brought something to your table like Stallworth. And go draft or sign that big bruising runningback.

All 3 of my brother in laws (god help them all) are knuckle-dragging, low-sloped forehead Eagles Fans. And all 3 (and every other of their slobbering idiot Eagles fans friends) agree...get a pounder and a burner, and this team is literally complete.

But the Eagles FO hasn't done this. And they've had years to rectify the problem.

And it's a glaring mystery...except that Reid still believes, I guess, that his offense can win a SB as a seriously flawed passing attack without any talent at wideout.

Even though evidence is overwhelming to the contrary.

[Redskin in Canada]

I'm saying the Eagles have a very smart organization. But they are always chronically under the cap because they're good at signing young players to long contracts, and dumping aging vets.

You analysis of this team is spotless. I can not argue with it. Each team projects the successes and failures of their front office.

Your wife must be quite a wonderful lady for you to put up with her brothers though ...

[Chris Luva Luva]

I'm saying the Eagles have a very smart organization. But they are always chronically under the cap because they're good at signing young players to long contracts, and dumping aging vets to stupid teams like the Redskins.

Fixed.

[Mursilis]

I think the need for, and the impact of, a great WR is overrated. A great WR is certainly nice to have, but it's not necessary for a team to be successful; certainly a lot less necessary than a great RB and/or a great QB. And certainly adding a great WR isn't going to help much if the rest of the team has issues. Adding Randy Moss certainly hasn't helped the Raiders, and having two good-to-great WRs hasn't helped the Cardinals either.

While people make much of the Pats for not spending money at the WR position, it's not like they ever had a great WR when they were winning three Super Bowls. Since Givens, Patten, and Branch have left, they haven't had any huge impact on their new teams, confirming they were never more than average-to-good WRs. Rather, they had a great QB (Brady) who made them look better. If I were the Eagles front office, I'd probably keep the WRs already on the roster, and get a solid, carry-the-load RB instead. That's the most important missing piece, IMHO.

[PulpExposure]

If I were the Eagles front office, I'd probably keep the WRs already on the roster,

Stallworth IS on the roster. He won't be very expensive to resign, and he had a lot of success with the Eagles this year. He added a big play dimension to their passing offense which just doesn't exist with Reggie Brown and the other schmucks.

No idea why they aren't interested in keeping him, though. It's a bit wierd.

and get a solid, carry-the-load RB instead. That's the most important missing piece, IMHO.

And the will to actually use that running back instead of hucking the ball 50 times a game.

[Mursilis]

If I were the Eagles front office, I'd probably keep the WRs already on the roster,

Stallworth IS on the roster. He won't be very expensive to resign, and he had a lot of success with the Eagles this year. He added a big play dimension to their passing offense which just doesn't exist with Reggie Brown and the other schmucks.

No idea why they aren't interested in keeping him, though. It's a bit wierd.

and get a solid, carry-the-load RB instead. That's the most important missing piece, IMHO.

And the will to actually use that running back instead of hucking the ball 50 times a game.

OK, my fault, I wasn't more clear. I knew Stallworth was on their roster - what I meant was, keep the WRs other than Stallworth on the roster, and get a dependable RB. Sure, keep Stallworth too if he can be signed for a decent price, but I certainly wouldn't break the bank for him. Reggie Brown actually had more catches that Stallworth, as did Westbrook and LJ Smith. Stallworth is like frosting on a cake - nice to have, but not essential, unlike a good RB.

As for their play-calling, I like what Gregg Easterbrook (Tuesday Morning QB columnist) calls it - 'pass-wacky'. You're right; having a solid RB won't help if they refuse to give him 20+ carries per game, but maybe the play-calling is only a reflection of the fact the Eagles don't feel they've got a 25+ carry back on the roster. Who knows? Of course, as a Redskins fan, I'm happier to see them remain flawed, and I have no interest in them becoming a more complete team!

[Mursilis]

D'oh!! Double post!

[PulpExposure]

Stallworth is like frosting on a cake - nice to have, but not essential, unlike a good RB.

Yeah, let me be clear. RB is their first need and has been for awhile. But...without Stallworth in the passing game, who scares you to go deep? Hank Baskett?

I mean hell, this was the same team that had James Thrash as their #1 for awhile.

As for their play-calling, I like what Gregg Easterbrook (Tuesday Morning QB columnist) calls it - 'pass-wacky'. You're right; having a solid RB won't help if they refuse to give him 20+ carries per game, but maybe the play-calling is only a reflection of the fact the Eagles don't feel they've got a 25+ carry back on the roster.

True except...then you'd think they would have actually drafted someone bigger than Bruce Perry or Reno Mahe. Or made a push for a FA running back. But they never have, which means it's not a priority.

Who knows? Of course, as a Redskins fan, I'm happier to see them remain flawed, and I have no interest in them becoming a more complete team!

Me either. It's a clinical exercise.

The small, petty person in me revels at the misery pervading the city of Philadelphia with their Eagles.

[Mursilis]

Stallworth is like frosting on a cake - nice to have, but not essential, unlike a good RB.

Yeah, let me be clear. RB is their first need and has been for awhile. But...without Stallworth in the passing game, who scares you to go deep? Hank Baskett?

I mean hell, this was the same team that had James Thrash as their #1 for awhile.

As for their play-calling, I like what Gregg Easterbrook (Tuesday Morning QB columnist) calls it - 'pass-wacky'. You're right; having a solid RB won't help if they refuse to give him 20+ carries per game, but maybe the play-calling is only a reflection of the fact the Eagles don't feel they've got a 25+ carry back on the roster.

True except...then you'd think they would have actually drafted someone bigger than Bruce Perry or Reno Mahe. Or made a push for a FA running back. But they never have, which means it's not a priority.

Who knows? Of course, as a Redskins fan, I'm happier to see them remain flawed, and I have no interest in them becoming a more complete team!

Me either. It's a clinical exercise.

Good points. We pretty much agree so I have nothing more to say there.

The small, petty person in me revels at the misery pervading the city of Philadelphia with their Eagles.

Misery, schmisery. I guess I can understand their pain somewhat at always being so close, yet no championship, but still, I have little sympathy. Lots of teams, in fact most teams, haven't won a Super Bowl in the past 20 years. At least Philly usually has a good run - they've been in the playoffs 5 of the past 6 years if I'm remembering correctly. They could do a lot worse - they're not Detroit or Cleveland or Arizona. At least they can have a realistic amount of hope at the start of every season; not all teams can say that by any means.

[1fan4ramsey]

Don't know how accurate this report is of the Eagles not resigning him, because I just heard on a local radio station here in Philly that the 2 sides met on Jan. 30th and the Eagles want to resign him and that he doesn't want to leave.