loyalboyd Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 BTW - Curtis has had 13 starts in his career. The cumulative totals in those starts: 13 starts 58 catches 907 yds 6 TDs Again a good point you raised. I just need to see how many games he did that with no other pro-bowl Wr out their with him. I wont say if it was good that is what will happen, or if he was bad that is what will happen. But when a DC got time to game plan on you and have game film oon you as a starter you best to believe he will catch some growing pains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 But you must have confidence that AJ Feely can step right in and do what Garcia did. IF you had Garcia still I would say its a possiblity. ......do you really think they can keep it up with Garcia gone. Boy, you really seem to have a lot of respect and admiration of Garcia. Isn't he the same Qb that couldn't play a lick with Detroit or Cleveland? He magically became a good QB with the Eagles? No??? Then what was it? the system? if its the system, then Feely should be fine, since the system is still the same. And it can't be the WRs, since our WRs stink, right? Your argument is going in circles. Face it, if Brown/Baskett/Avant/Lewis can perform against the #1 CBs from around the league, then Curtis should have no problem fitting in nicely. And don't keep saying he was paid a "Boatload" of money. He was paid about the going rate for a low-#1, high #2 WR. To lock up a HEALTHY guy for 6 years for reasonable money who should only get better as he learns the system & develops rapport with McNabb seems a solid investment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 He was paid about the going rate for a low-#1, high #2 WR. Again, this is something that Kevin Curtis would never be described as prior to this contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Again, this is something that Kevin Curtis would never be described as prior to this contract. Correct...esp since he had Holt and Bruce in front of him, remember???? With those two, how could he be anything but a #3? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 But I know Leinhan would not let him leave if he knew he could be the playmaker everyone making him out to be. I tried to make that argument a few pages ago, save your breath. He's gonna be the second coming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Next Generation Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 He's gonna be the second coming. NOWHERE does anyone even suggest that he's some kind of savior or anything other than a good WR who can help the Eagles next year. Nice spin, though, I'm sure you'll come back next year and say, "See, I told you..." and proclaim yourself a genius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 NOWHERE does anyone even suggest that he's some kind of savior or anything other than a good WR who can help the Eagles next year. Nice spin, though, I'm sure you'll come back next year and say, "See, I told you..." and proclaim yourself a genius. I questioned why Curtis was let go by the Rams when they turned around and gave Drew freakin' Bennett practically the same contract. That does'nt seem strange to you?? The 2nd coming was sarcasm, maybe you've heard of it? You know, like when Eagles fans say" we're gonna win a Super Bowl someday". At least I always thought they were being sarcastic. Since you're "sure I'll come back next year and say I told you so", do some research, dig up a time I've done that around here and get back to me. Look, it seems to me that when a "nice " #3 wr goes elsewhere and tries to be the #1 or #2 guy, it does'nt work more than it does. Maybe I'm wrong, it's happened once or twice before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 I tried to make that argument a few pages ago, save your breath. He's gonna be the second coming. Really? Most Eagle homers feel he'll be a solid #2 or #3 in this offense who'll be given a chance to perform with a Pro Bowl QB who throws the ball 60-65% of the time. Who said he'd be the "second coming"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Really? Most Eagle homers feel he'll be a solid #2 or #3 in this offense who'll be given a chance to perform with a Pro Bowl QB who throws the ball 60-65% of the time. Who said he'd be the "second coming"? already been addressed. Read before you post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 I questioned why Curtis was let go by the Rams when they turned around and gave Drew freakin' Bennett practically the same contract. That does'nt seem strange to you?? IMO Bennett is the better reciever of the 2. I expect more out of him than the Eagles get out of Curtis this year. Look, it seems to me that when a "nice " #3 wr goes elsewhere and tries to be the #1 or #2 guy, it does'nt work more than it does. I agree. for a team that spends its money very wisely(IMO) the Eagles blew it on this 1(IMO). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 (edited) I questioned why Curtis was let go by the Rams when they turned around and gave Drew freakin' Bennett practically the same contract. That does'nt seem strange to you?? Uh, the Rams publically stated they wanted a tall, possession WR...Does the 5' 11" Curtis fit that bill to you? Not to hard to figure out. Edited March 19, 2007 by i_am_the_swammi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 maybe Drew Bennett is a better WR than Kevin Curtis?....mostly due to his size... why pay Curtis x amount of dollars when you can get Bennett for the same price before Curtis signs somewhere and drives Bennett's value up... smart move by the Rams...even though the Eagles made a wise move in picking up Curtis IMO.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Next Generation Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 I questioned why Curtis was let go by the Rams when they turned around and gave Drew freakin' Bennett practically the same contract. That does'nt seem strange to you?? The 2nd coming was sarcasm, maybe you've heard of it? You know, like when Eagles fans say" we're gonna win a Super Bowl someday". At least I always thought they were being sarcastic. Since you're "sure I'll come back next year and say I told you so", do some research, dig up a time I've done that around here and get back to me. Look, it seems to me that when a "nice " #3 wr goes elsewhere and tries to be the #1 or #2 guy, it does'nt work more than it does. Maybe I'm wrong, it's happened once or twice before. Yes, genius, it's sarcasm and it's lame. You try to ridicule people who think that this is a good signing for the Eagles, yet you offer nothing other than speculation. And, when those you ridicule offer facts and explainations, you get sarcastic again...very lame. Q: Why did the Rams get rid of Curtis, only to sign Bennett? A: They wanted taller receivers and got 2 of them in Bennett and McMichael Also, Curtis didn't want to re-sign in St. Louis, he wanted to start. Said Linehan, "I known Kevin is looking for a starting job. He got a taste of starting a couple of years ago when Isaac got hurt, and I might be wrong, but I think that is something that is going through his mind." Fact: When Bruce was injured and Curtis started, facing opposing #1 and/or #2 CBs, he actually produced like a decent #1 WR. Fact: He has good hands (Stallworth was so-so), he has a great work ethic and runs great routes. Generally, the type of player any team would want. Fact: When the Eagles were without Stallworth last year, they averaged more yds/game than when he played. So, add the facts up and you get the sense that a) the Rams knew he was gone, so they went in another direction he has produced when asked to be a #2 WR c) The Eagles offense was pretty good even without adding him into the mix (or someone like him) d) it was a good signing for the Eagles (not great, just good). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.