What they're saying: Best-/worst-case scenarios for Eagles in 2021, Hurts vs. Wentz (again) and more

We're just a few weeks from the start of Eagles training camp when we'll actually have real football to write about. In the meantime, there are a lot of rankings, lists, previews, and comparisons being made — and sometimes that makes for even better content for a roundup post. 

I guess that makes us lucky since that's exactly why we're here. So let's not waste any more time and dive right in with out latest look at what they're saying about the Birds... 

For better ... or worse

Ben Linsey | Pro Football Focus

There aren't a lot of people placing high expectations on the Eagles this season, and it's not entirely surprising given that they have a second-year QB (with just a few games of experience under his belt) starting under center and a first-year coach, as well as a relatively young and inexperienced coaching staff over all.

Then again, while they don't have a super deep roster, they are strong at some positions, have a few youngsters who could make a surprise impact, and have key veterans on both sides of the ball to help bring those younger players up to speed. On top of that, they play in a division that, while it almost certainly has to be better than last year, still isn't all that great. So maybe there's a chance for Philly to surprise some people this season.

But what would that even look like? With an odd number of games this season, there won't be any .500 records, but would 8-9 or 9-8 be better than expected? For me it certainly would be, as I see the Birds closer to 6-10 this year. 

But would you say that 9-8 is about as good as the Eagles could possibly do in 2021? That's what they're saying over at Pro Football Focus, and it's hard to argue with them. Finishing anywhere above .500 would feel like a major win for the Eagles, especially if Jalen Hurts impresses and shows them he can be the man at QB moving forward. But if he struggles and the Eagles somehow (read: impossibly) still finish above .500, that's going to really hurt come draft time if the team is looking to replace Hurts. 

• MORE ON THE EAGLES
• Eagles 2021 training camp preview: Center
  
• Eagles player review: Jalen Reagor edition
  
• N'Keal Harry wants out of New England. Should Eagles try to trade for the young receiver?
  
• John McMullen: A ‘Hard Knock' at Lurie and the conventional-thinking Eagles
  

Of course, there's the other end of the spectrum, and PFF took a look at both. After running a ton of simulations of the entire NFL season, they came up with what they consider to be the best- and worst-case scenarios for every NFL team this season. Here's what they had to say about the Birds... 

PHILADELPHIA EAGLES

10th percentile outcome: 4-13

How they get there: Philadelphia’s weaknesses on the perimeter remain an issue, and age starts to affect the play of perceived strengths in the trenches.

Second-year quarterback Jalen Hurts cannot lead an effective passing attack one season after 29.4% of his passes were charted as uncatchable, the highest rate among quarterbacks who attempted at least 100 passes last season. And whoever starts at cornerback alongside Darius Slay is targeted frequently when the Eagles are on defense. Avonte Maddox earned just a 37.1 coverage grade in that role last year.    

90th percentile outcome: 9-8

How they get there: An offensive line no longer playing musical chairs due to injury makes a big difference. Lane Johnson (88.8 PFF grade in 2019) and Brandon Brooks (92.8 PFF grade in 2019) return at full strength, and Andre Dillard wins the left tackle job, looking like the player Philadelphia was hoping for when they spent a first-round pick on him two years ago. DeVonta Smith shows that any pre-draft concerns over his weight were overblown, too. That all gives Hurts a chance to show that he can be the franchise’s future at the quarterback position.   [pff.com]

Wentz vs. Hurts

Cody Benjamin | CBS Sports

This debate isn't going anywhere, is it? In fact, this just might be a continuation of the Wentz vs. Foles debate that nearly tore this city apart. 

Anyway, over at CBS Sports, Cody Benjamin has a measured take (with the facts to back it up) on which quarterback will have the better career moving forward (the next three years), which should really be what Eagles fans care about (not which one was better last year).

His answer, however, may not be the one Philly fans were hoping for... 

Still, true grit and an infectious personality don't always translate to long-term results and/or front-office commitment. Just ask Nick Foles. So what if we're putting more weight not on how Hurts and Wentz are wired or perceived but what they can consistently do with the ball in their hands? Using their college and NFL resumes as evidence, it's fairly clear that Hurts offers more as a runner, whereas Wentz offers more as a passer. [...]

Which skill set is better suited to guide a team to a championship, the ultimate "franchise QB" validation? History says moving the ball through the air is still the safest bet. Of the last 20 Super Bowl-winning QBs, all but one were primarily pocket passers, with only Russell Wilson eclipsing 85 carries during a title run. The list reads like a who's who of non-running throwers, at least in comparison to guys like Murray and Jackson: Tom Brady (2020), Patrick Mahomes (2019), Brady (2018), Foles (2017), Brady (2016), Peyton Manning (2015), Brady (2014), Russell Wilson (2013), Joe Flacco (2012), Eli Manning (2011), Aaron Rodgers (2010), Drew Brees (2009), Ben Roethlisberger (2008), Eli (2007), Peyton (2006), Roethlisberger (2005), Brady (2004), Brady (2003), Brad Johnson (2002), Brady (2001).

For every Jackson that makes the playoffs, there are consistently about five Bradys or Flaccos. That's not to say run-heavy QBs can't buck the trend -- there are far fewer QBs who rely so heavily on their legs -- but it's fair to wonder if there's a reason more traditional pocket passers (even those who can move, but don't depend on it) remain the tradition. Even in today's NFL, it's the QBs who showcase their arm far more than their legs -- and, by extension, their teams -- who tend to win, or at least get to the playoffs.

So where does that leave us on Hurts versus Wentz? It seems clear that Wentz gives you a much higher ceiling as a passer, and thus gives you a better chance at a title. By nature of being more of a gunslinger type, perhaps trusting himself too much and bottoming out mentally or mechanically, he's far riskier than more calculated (Brady) or more gifted (Mahomes) QBs. But at the end of the day, he gives you the requisite upside as a passer. It helps, in his case, that he's already proven, more than once, he can be a top-half-of-the-NFL starter, which historically makes him far more likely to last as a No. 1 than Hurts, regardless of the latter's promise.  [cbsports.com]

Heading in the wrong direction

Tim McManus | ESPN

Speaking of comparing the two QBs, ESPN's Tim McManus went up and down the Eagles roster looking at whether they will be better or worse at each in 2021. Despite Wentz being the worst QB in the league last year, McManus believes the Birds somehow got worse at the position. 

And it's kind of hard to argue with him, especially if he's looking at the entirety of the QB room. 

Quarterbacks

Additions: Joe Flacco (one-year, $3.5 million deal), Nick Mullens (one-year, $970,000 deal)

Losses: Wentz (Colts), Nate Sudfeld (49ers)

Returners: Hurts

Better, worse or the same: Worse

Wentz was at the bottom of the league statistically last season. He led the NFL in interceptions (15) and sacks (50) despite playing in just 12 games. Hurts should have no issues bettering that performance, so in one sense, the Eagles are set for an upgrade at quarterback this season.

But we all know Wentz is better than what he showed in 2020. Even with the down campaign, he still ranks second all-time among Eagles quarterbacks in interception percentage (2.0) and passer rating (89.2) and is third in completion rate (62.7%). Though he might not return to his 2017 near-MVP form, it's hard to deny the 28-year-old Wentz has more upside than the 36-year-old Flacco at this stage in their careers, and there's less projection involved with Wentz than there is with Hurts.

That said, the reviews on Hurts' leadership have been strong since he stepped into the huddle, and the QB room should have a healthier atmosphere now that the quarterback controversy is behind them.  [espn.com]

• Pickswise is #1 home of free NFL picks, predictions and odds. Find the latest lines and opinions for every game.
• NFL Picks
• NFL Predictions
• NFL Odds

Not an NFL arm?

Reuben Frank | NBC Sports Philadelphia

Over at NBC Sports Philadelphia, Reuben Frank took a look at the argument some will make that Hurts doesn't have an NFL-caliber arm. And he came out in strong defense of the Eagles QB, rattling off facts and numbers in typical Roob fashion about Hurts' success both in a modern context as well as historical context, like the fact that only 10 QBs ever put up the numbers Hurts did in his first 3 starts (the only three full games he played).

For those who think Hurts is a one-trick pony (his rushing ability), Roob has a message for you...

Still doubt whether Hurts has an NFL arm?

How did he complete nine passes of 30 yards over the last five weeks of the season, second most in the NFL during that span and one fewer than Drew Brees threw all year in 250 more attempts?

How did he have as many games with 330 or more yards as Donovan McNabb had in his first five seasons?

How did he have more passing yards in his first three starts than any quarterback in the Pro Football Hall of Fame had as a rookie?

How did he average 13.8 yards per completion, highest by any NFL rookie in 23 years?

I don’t know what Hurts’ future looks like. I don’t know if he’s the answer at QB. I don’t know if they’re going to need to draft a quarterback next year. [...]

But I know one thing. If Hurts fails, it won’t be because he can’t throw a football.  [nbcsports.com]

Doug on Wentz/Hurts

John McMullen | Sports Illustrated

And finally, we'll cap off this Wentz/Hurts-heavy WTS with a look at what Doug Pederson had to say earlier this week on Sirius/XM Radio when asked about the team's decision to draft Hurts when they already had Wentz on the roster... 

"[We] brought in Jalen Hurts, not to undermine Carson Wentz, not to do anything to take away his job or anything because Carson was our starter," Pederson said. "[Wentz] was the franchise and all that moving forward. But [we wanted] someone that could come in and could be the backup and learn how to play the NFL game, bring his talent to the Philadelphia Eagles."

The law of unintended consequences hit Philadelphia hard, however.

The atypical nature of selecting a QB so high in the draft at No. 53 overall when the perceived face of the franchise was in the prime of his career at 27 and about 10 months off a record-setting extension proved to be a miscalculation of epic proportions as Wentz began to question the franchise's motives. [...]

“You go into drafts and you go into each year looking for quarterbacks,” Pederson said. “And we continued to look for quarterbacks, and that’s always something that will never change. We won a Super Bowl with our backup quarterback [Nick Foles]. And we’ve had to play with our backups a couple of times in Philadelphia."

In many ways, the selection of Hurts may have made some sense in a vacuum but it failed to take into account human nature.  [si.com]