Eagles players trying to court Muhammad

[eaglesrule]

well, Im not really fishing -- I should have been more precise. I don't think -=- or mean to convey that "overrate" means "not good" -- i think you can be the best at something and sill "overrated" if people exagerrate the distance between number one and number two.

I think he is overrated as a solution for the eagles. I think he is overrated relative to the price he would cost versus his ability, versus. so he would be an upgrade over westbrook -- but I don't feel that upgrade is so much as to warrant the payday.

I also think that for someone who is suppossedly a franchise back -- his attitude is trash. I know people can correct that, but his "stab me in the back" comment was BS. They were in the playoff hunt. I think in terms of helping a team by being a teammate he is overrated.

so in a roundabout way, I think that he is "overrated" as a solution to the problem -- a lot of eagles fans think he is the savior or something.

All considered with these cosnierations and how the eagles are never going to give him that amount of carries, it seems like an overrated idea to me, and for the eagles needs, an overrated player/solution.

[SwiperNoSwiping]

I agree with a lot that you say there Eaglesrule. I think the Eagles wouldn't be wise to spend their money on Alexander. They have other needs they can address, and already have Westbrook. They could find a serviceable #2 back (Atrain seems to fit the bill for example) at a much more cap friendly price, and be able to address a #2 WR.

Alexander has put up monster numbers. Of course so did Dorsey Levens and Edgar Bennett under Holmgren. Could he be possibly a product of the system to an extent? It's possible. He has a great line ahead of him anchored by Walter Jones. I am not saying Alexander is not good, but he may be overkill for the Eagles. He clearly has been great the last few years. But I don't see how Philly needs both him and Westbrook.

His attitude did come across as shotty to me on multiple occassions last year in my opinion. There was the issue of the 'one yard' plus bringing up the he may want out of Seattle publicly during the season. I think both issues are bad for his rep there. Maybe going to a perennial contender like Philly would offset that and it would go away (ala Dillon this year) but maybe it wouldn't.

[eaglesrule]

after I re-read my post, I realized how garbled some of it was (was trying to bang it out quickly)

lets assume westbrook is a thousand yard back. He had 800 rush yards and basically missed 3 games -- so I think it is a fair assumption. If we figure SA at 1600 rushing, 1800 total, basically the Eagles would be paying that much for 600 rush yards more, and only 300 total yards more. I don't think it makes sense. You supplement Alexander with someone -- you don't make him a suppliment. so then you start him. Ok fair enough. But then you lose a very dynamic part of your O in westbrook. I think Westbrook is too good to only be a 3rd down back -- he needs to be on the field.

So essentially given the eagles philosphy -- you are paying the premium for a guy who could be featured in a heavy running offense. if you figure at best, he would split with Westbrook 50 50 and you gave it 35 rushes a game (something that is unlikely) -- you are paying a 30 rush guy full money for half the work. It makes no sense. And really, the eagles only need someone who can 37 rush yards a game to get to alexander levels.

I think it is a pipe dream, and a waste of money. The cancer thing can be overrated -- Owens, Dillon -- but they filled gaping holes, they weren't brought in to be icing.

wehn yout hink about the "threeagle" attack of two years ago -- duce, westbrook and buckhalter combined to be one hell of a nice RB. I bet they could duplicate that with a second-tier guy like atrain, davenport or someone like that.