Everybody loves new Eagles CB Riq Woolen 64%

By Jimmy Kempski14%

7/20/2026, 10:55:17 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Recency Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 22.9% saturation with 176 hits. Analysis detected 1,440 faulty-reasoning hits from 770 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 58.6% and a BS Rank of 64% (7,944 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 63.70% of the article peer group.

Nick Sirianni doesn't typically like singling out players for playing well in practices, but he made a rare exception for one in an interview ahead of Eagles training camp. 
"There are so many guys working their asses off that I never want to be like, 'Oh, this guy looks good, and I didn't mention this guy. 
But Riq Woolen, I'm really excited to have him," Sirianni said. 
"And I feel like every day I'm like, 'Wow, that was an impressive play. 
"We can get so caught up in wow plays. 
What wins is consistency. 
But the wow plays are fun to watch. 
And like, he has a lot of wow plays and he is consistent. 
He's being consistent with that. 
And so I'm really, really looking forward to him and Quinyon and Coop kind of roaming back there. 
"And Riq works his butt off, and you're not supposed to look like that when you play corner. 
Like he just looks the part. 
I have these guys throughout the NFL of like, ‘Hey that dude didn't look real.’ 
You look at somebody like  I remember I used to think that way when I saw Calvin Johnson as a receiver. 
I always thought that of Julio Jones. 
You ain't supposed to look like that. 
And I feel like that with Riq. 
Like, you ain't supposed to look like that at that position. 
He's freaky. 
And yeah, excited about that." 
Woolen is indeed a size-speed freak of nature. 
He's 6'4 with 34" arms, and he ran a 4.26 40 at the Combine. 
This is an all-timer spider chart: 
Woolen was a Seahawks fifth-round pick in 2022 who started immediately as a rookie, finishing third in Defensive Rookie of the Year honors, when he had 63 tackles, six INTs, 16 pass breakups, and three fumble recoveries. 
He also made the Pro Bowl as a rookie. 
However, Woolen was unable to sustain that level of play, and he struggled in 2025, even losing playing time while being floated on the trade block for the better part of the season. 
Our Geoff Mosher showed some of good and bad of Woolen's play back in March. 
But the concerns haven't quelled enthusiasm for what Woolen can be in Vic Fangio's defense. 
Fangio was also pleased with his initial exposure to Woolen back in May. 
"I'm excited to have him," Fangio said. 
"We looked at him during the middle of the season last year a little bit because [the Seahawks] may have been interested in trading him, and we didn't decide to do it and I didn't get too involved in the evaluation. 
"But then when it came free agency time this year and I actually sat down and watched him thoroughly, I was excited for him and kind of surprised that he was one of those guys that didn't get a lot of action for a long-term deal. 
I was thrilled to get him. 
I think he's going to play good for us." 
MORE EAGLES 
Things to watch for at Eagles training camp: Specialist edition 
ESPN survey shows that the Eagles are both loaded and underrated 
Three free agent signings who make sense for the Eagles prior to training camp 
Fangio doesn't blow smoke. 
In fact, his initial comments look a whole lot different from his early comments about Adoree' Jackson, who the Eagles acquired last offseason in free agency. 
"I don't know if I think it's the place," Fangio said last July, when asked what makes him think Jackson could succeed in Philly. 
"I think it's time for him to show that. 
In Tennessee, when it came time to re-sign him after his contract was up, they didn't. 
The Giants, his contract was up, they didn't. 
It's time to show who he is or who he isn't." 
Lol. 
Media types have noticed as well. 
Because, well, Woolen's play on the field has been obviously impressive. 
We had him atop our spring practice "stock up" players a month ago, for example. 
At a minimum, the Eagles are heading into 2026 training camp with a much better outlook at corner, with a pair of First-Team All-Pros in Quinyon Mitchell and Cooper DeJean, joined by Woolen, when last year it was Jackson and Kelee Ringo competing for the third CB spot, followed later by additions like Jakorian Bennett and others into the season. 
Woolen has a chance to bring the Eagles' already elite cornerback group to another level. 
Follow Jimmy & PhillyVoice on Twitter: @JimmyKempski | thePhillyVoice 
Like us on Facebook: PhillyVoice Sports 
Add Jimmy's RSS feed to your feed reader 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.3%Jimmy Kempski: 3.9%PhillyVoice: 2.7%Confirmation Bias7.3%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.8%PhillyVoice: 1.1%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 14.4%Jimmy Kempski: 2.7%PhillyVoice: 3.0%Availability Heuristic14.4%This article: 3.1%Jimmy Kempski: 1.3%PhillyVoice: 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic3.1%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.7%PhillyVoice: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 1.4%PhillyVoice: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Jimmy Kempski: 1.8%PhillyVoice: 4.3%Framing Effect2.6%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.4%PhillyVoice: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 7.8%Jimmy Kempski: 0.7%PhillyVoice: 0.4%Status Quo Bias7.8%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.4%PhillyVoice: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 11.2%Jimmy Kempski: 4.9%PhillyVoice: 4.7%Optimism Bias11.2%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 1.0%PhillyVoice: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 6.8%Jimmy Kempski: 3.7%PhillyVoice: 6.6%Negativity Bias6.8%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.6%PhillyVoice: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.6%PhillyVoice: 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.3%PhillyVoice: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 22.9%Jimmy Kempski: 4.4%PhillyVoice: 3.5%Halo Effect22.9%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 15.5%Jimmy Kempski: 2.4%PhillyVoice: 1.6%Recency Bias15.5%This article: 7.3%Jimmy Kempski: 0.6%PhillyVoice: 0.5%Primacy Effect7.3%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.8%Jimmy Kempski: 1.2%PhillyVoice: 3.0%Appeal to Authority11.8%This article: 1.4%Jimmy Kempski: 0.5%PhillyVoice: 1.1%False Dilemma1.4%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.6%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.6%This article: 7.4%Jimmy Kempski: 3.6%PhillyVoice: 3.8%Hasty Generalization7.4%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 1.7%Jimmy Kempski: 0.3%PhillyVoice: 0.3%Bandwagon1.7%This article: 3.6%Jimmy Kempski: 0.9%PhillyVoice: 3.5%Appeal to Emotion3.6%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.3%PhillyVoice: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 3.1%Jimmy Kempski: 0.6%PhillyVoice: 1.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.1%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.3%Jimmy Kempski: 0.2%PhillyVoice: 0.4%Burden of Proof2.3%This article: 5.7%Jimmy Kempski: 0.5%PhillyVoice: 0.2%Appeal to Nature5.7%This article: 7.8%Jimmy Kempski: 0.7%PhillyVoice: 0.3%Composition/Division7.8%This article: 14.0%Jimmy Kempski: 1.9%PhillyVoice: 1.6%Anecdotal14.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 16.6%Jimmy Kempski: 2.1%PhillyVoice: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)16.6%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.1%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.3%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.4%Jimmy Kempski: 0.6%PhillyVoice: 1.0%Unattributed Quote1.4%This article: 0.8%Jimmy Kempski: 0.3%PhillyVoice: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.8%This article: 3.5%Jimmy Kempski: 3.9%PhillyVoice: 4.3%Biased Writer Voice3.5%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.1%PhillyVoice: 1.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Kempski: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 6.4%Jimmy Kempski: 1.8%PhillyVoice: 2.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…6.4%

770 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers50%attributed speech382writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 27 words • 100.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 11 words • 100.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 14 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 9 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 4 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 8 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 13 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 5 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 18 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 18 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 6 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 15 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 22 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 7 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 7 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 7 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 11 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 2 words • 0.0% coverageNick Sirianni • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageGeoff Mosher • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageVic Fangio • 7 words • 0.0% coverageVic Fangio • 41 words • 0.0% coverageVic Fangio • 46 words • 0.0% coverageVic Fangio • 6 words • 0.0% coverageVic Fangio • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageESPN • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageVic Fangio • 24 words • 0.0% coverageVic Fangio • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageVic Fangio • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 60 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

ESPN

100%flagged-word coverage
11 attributed words2.8% of attributed speech79% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -12.8 ptsWriter: 12.8%ESPN: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-1.6 ptsWriter: 1.6%ESPN: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.