^ 21 running plays called in the entire game. Would you like to guess how many of them were called during their only sustained drive that resulted in their only touchdown of the game?
NINE.
Nine runs and two passes on their only offensive touchdown scoring drive of the entire game. Almost half of their entire runs in the game on this one drive. N.I.N.E. T.I.M.E.S they ran the ball. 11 plays. 58 yards. Chews up 6 minutes and and 16 seconds of clock. This is the only drive of the game they even resembled the offense we're accustomed to this year. The rest of the game? 11 runs total. Not going to work like that in January.
Clement got two carries and averaged 7 yards a rush. Ajayi is and has always been a volume back. He needs more than just 14 carries a game to be effective. Cold windy night with Folks playing like garbage and the receivers not getting open, this is the kind of game you call 38 runs and 21 passes, not the other way around. Gotta be smarter than that against much better teams next month.
Stick to your shitty St Joes basketball team, 'Takes.
ah when you lose the argument change the argument. Literally the first line you posted was about the percentages of runs to pass. I proved it was bullshit based on the two end of half drives so now you change the argument. Next time lead with the scoring drive that had 9 runs.
i will stick with my Hawks as I always do. Looking forward to conference play.
Oh you're under the assumption this is an argument? That's why you're confused. This isn't an argument. This is one informed fan explaining something to an uninformed person.
They passed the ball too much on a night when the conditions were bad and the back up quarterback was struggling and the receivers were not getting open. Regarding percentages, I put it in bold. I said I would have rather ran 38 times and thrown 21 times. So I don't know what you're talking about, unless you just chose to ignore that part of my post.
Also, as I and others have tried to explain to you countless times over the years, it's not just how many times but WHEN you run. When almost half of your runs come on the only successful drive of the game, logic dictates that it's working and you might want to stick with it. They didn't and almost lost to a bad team who had nothing to play for.
And I ignored your little idea of removing pass plays from two drives thing because it's......just a sorry and pathetic way of manipulating numbers to convey an illogical point. If you're going to remove the two largest passing drives, it would make sense to also remove the two largest running drives to get a fairer idea of what happened during the rest of the game. So remove the 9 from their only successful drive and 3 from the following drive (yes 3 was the next highest number). So you're left with 23 passes and 9 runs......oh, hey, look at that. Passing on a 71% clip. Gotta be better than that next month.
Get lost, 'Takes. You're just no good at this.
you just don't understand today's NFL if you think running the ball 60% of more of the time is a way to win. some facts below...
only 1 team in over a decade has run the ball even 50% of the time during their season and has won a Super Bowl. The 2013/2014 Seahawks who had a historically good defense. And you want this Eagles team to run something like 65% of the time? Utterly fucking absurd.
only 3 teams in the current playoff race are with 1 percentage point of running it 50% of the time..and you want the Eagles to run it 65% of the time? again utterly fucking absurd.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,248
^ 21 running plays called in the entire game. Would you like to guess how many of them were called during their only sustained drive that resulted in their only touchdown of the game?
NINE.
Nine runs and two passes on their only offensive touchdown scoring drive of the entire game. Almost half of their entire runs in the game on this one drive. N.I.N.E. T.I.M.E.S they ran the ball. 11 plays. 58 yards. Chews up 6 minutes and and 16 seconds of clock. This is the only drive of the game they even resembled the offense we're accustomed to this year. The rest of the game? 11 runs total. Not going to work like that in January.
Clement got two carries and averaged 7 yards a rush. Ajayi is and has always been a volume back. He needs more than just 14 carries a game to be effective. Cold windy night with Folks playing like garbage and the receivers not getting open, this is the kind of game you call 38 runs and 21 passes, not the other way around. Gotta be smarter than that against much better teams next month.
Stick to your shitty St Joes basketball team, 'Takes.
ah when you lose the argument change the argument. Literally the first line you posted was about the percentages of runs to pass. I proved it was bullshit based on the two end of half drives so now you change the argument. Next time lead with the scoring drive that had 9 runs.
i will stick with my Hawks as I always do. Looking forward to conference play.
Oh you're under the assumption this is an argument? That's why you're confused. This isn't an argument. This is one informed fan explaining something to an uninformed person.
They passed the ball too much on a night when the conditions were bad and the back up quarterback was struggling and the receivers were not getting open. Regarding percentages, I put it in bold. I said I would have rather ran 38 times and thrown 21 times. So I don't know what you're talking about, unless you just chose to ignore that part of my post.
Also, as I and others have tried to explain to you countless times over the years, it's not just how many times but WHEN you run. When almost half of your runs come on the only successful drive of the game, logic dictates that it's working and you might want to stick with it. They didn't and almost lost to a bad team who had nothing to play for.
And I ignored your little idea of removing pass plays from two drives thing because it's......just a sorry and pathetic way of manipulating numbers to convey an illogical point. If you're going to remove the two largest passing drives, it would make sense to also remove the two largest running drives to get a fairer idea of what happened during the rest of the game. So remove the 9 from their only successful drive and 3 from the following drive (yes 3 was the next highest number). So you're left with 23 passes and 9 runs......oh, hey, look at that. Passing on a 71% clip. Gotta be better than that next month.
Get lost, 'Takes. You're just no good at this.
you just don't understand today's NFL if you think running the ball 60% of more of the time is a way to win. some facts below...
only 1 team in over a decade has run the ball even 50% of the time during their season and has won a Super Bowl. The 2013/2014 Seahawks who had a historically good defense. And you want this Eagles team to run something like 65% of the time? Utterly fucking absurd.
only 3 teams in the current playoff race are with 1 percentage point of running it 50% of the time..and you want the Eagles to run it 65% of the time? again utterly fucking absurd.
ONE game, you dummy. We're talking about this week's game with a struggling back up quarterback in cold windy conditions when his receivers could not get open. And I see you have nothing to combat what I said in my last post so you provide bogus, incomplete stats yet again.
Hey, look at this! Here's all of the first place teams and their run pass ratios for clarity:
AVG: 54/46. ----right where I've always suggested winning teams should be. They're actually running more this year than in the last few. You'll notice that the Eagles, who have the best record in the league have a 53/47 ratio. So passing it 65% of the time, with all the other factors I've mentioned, isn't quite the best recipe for their success.
And I know it's shocking to you, but some games dictate that you should run more than pass. Sunday night was one of those nights.
^ 21 running plays called in the entire game. Would you like to guess how many of them were called during their only sustained drive that resulted in their only touchdown of the game?
NINE.
Nine runs and two passes on their only offensive touchdown scoring drive of the entire game. Almost half of their entire runs in the game on this one drive. N.I.N.E. T.I.M.E.S they ran the ball. 11 plays. 58 yards. Chews up 6 minutes and and 16 seconds of clock. This is the only drive of the game they even resembled the offense we're accustomed to this year. The rest of the game? 11 runs total. Not going to work like that in January.
Clement got two carries and averaged 7 yards a rush. Ajayi is and has always been a volume back. He needs more than just 14 carries a game to be effective. Cold windy night with Folks playing like garbage and the receivers not getting open, this is the kind of game you call 38 runs and 21 passes, not the other way around. Gotta be smarter than that against much better teams next month.
Stick to your shitty St Joes basketball team, 'Takes.
ah when you lose the argument change the argument. Literally the first line you posted was about the percentages of runs to pass. I proved it was bullshit based on the two end of half drives so now you change the argument. Next time lead with the scoring drive that had 9 runs.
i will stick with my Hawks as I always do. Looking forward to conference play.
Oh you're under the assumption this is an argument? That's why you're confused. This isn't an argument. This is one informed fan explaining something to an uninformed person.
They passed the ball too much on a night when the conditions were bad and the back up quarterback was struggling and the receivers were not getting open. Regarding percentages, I put it in bold. I said I would have rather ran 38 times and thrown 21 times. So I don't know what you're talking about, unless you just chose to ignore that part of my post.
Also, as I and others have tried to explain to you countless times over the years, it's not just how many times but WHEN you run. When almost half of your runs come on the only successful drive of the game, logic dictates that it's working and you might want to stick with it. They didn't and almost lost to a bad team who had nothing to play for.
And I ignored your little idea of removing pass plays from two drives thing because it's......just a sorry and pathetic way of manipulating numbers to convey an illogical point. If you're going to remove the two largest passing drives, it would make sense to also remove the two largest running drives to get a fairer idea of what happened during the rest of the game. So remove the 9 from their only successful drive and 3 from the following drive (yes 3 was the next highest number). So you're left with 23 passes and 9 runs......oh, hey, look at that. Passing on a 71% clip. Gotta be better than that next month.
Get lost, 'Takes. You're just no good at this.
you just don't understand today's NFL if you think running the ball 60% of more of the time is a way to win. some facts below...
only 1 team in over a decade has run the ball even 50% of the time during their season and has won a Super Bowl. The 2013/2014 Seahawks who had a historically good defense. And you want this Eagles team to run something like 65% of the time? Utterly fucking absurd.
only 3 teams in the current playoff race are with 1 percentage point of running it 50% of the time..and you want the Eagles to run it 65% of the time? again utterly fucking absurd.
ONE game, you dummy. We're talking about this week's game with a struggling back up quarterback in cold windy conditions when his receivers could not get open. And I see you have nothing to combat what I said in my last post so you provide bogus, incomplete stats yet again.
Hey, look at this! Here's all of the first place teams and their run pass ratios for clarity:
AVG: 54/46. ----right where I've always suggested winning teams should be. They're actually running more this year than in the last few. You'll notice that the Eagles, who have the best record in the league have a 53/47 ratio. So passing it 65% of the time, with all the other factors I've mentioned, isn't quite the best recipe for their success.
And I know it's shocking to you, but some games dictate that you should run more than pass. Sunday night was one of those nights.
You have nothing. You always have nothing.
edit: eh you're not worth it. have a good day and life.
Post edited by pjhawks on
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,248
^ 21 running plays called in the entire game. Would you like to guess how many of them were called during their only sustained drive that resulted in their only touchdown of the game?
NINE.
Nine runs and two passes on their only offensive touchdown scoring drive of the entire game. Almost half of their entire runs in the game on this one drive. N.I.N.E. T.I.M.E.S they ran the ball. 11 plays. 58 yards. Chews up 6 minutes and and 16 seconds of clock. This is the only drive of the game they even resembled the offense we're accustomed to this year. The rest of the game? 11 runs total. Not going to work like that in January.
Clement got two carries and averaged 7 yards a rush. Ajayi is and has always been a volume back. He needs more than just 14 carries a game to be effective. Cold windy night with Folks playing like garbage and the receivers not getting open, this is the kind of game you call 38 runs and 21 passes, not the other way around. Gotta be smarter than that against much better teams next month.
Stick to your shitty St Joes basketball team, 'Takes.
ah when you lose the argument change the argument. Literally the first line you posted was about the percentages of runs to pass. I proved it was bullshit based on the two end of half drives so now you change the argument. Next time lead with the scoring drive that had 9 runs.
i will stick with my Hawks as I always do. Looking forward to conference play.
Oh you're under the assumption this is an argument? That's why you're confused. This isn't an argument. This is one informed fan explaining something to an uninformed person.
They passed the ball too much on a night when the conditions were bad and the back up quarterback was struggling and the receivers were not getting open. Regarding percentages, I put it in bold. I said I would have rather ran 38 times and thrown 21 times. So I don't know what you're talking about, unless you just chose to ignore that part of my post.
Also, as I and others have tried to explain to you countless times over the years, it's not just how many times but WHEN you run. When almost half of your runs come on the only successful drive of the game, logic dictates that it's working and you might want to stick with it. They didn't and almost lost to a bad team who had nothing to play for.
And I ignored your little idea of removing pass plays from two drives thing because it's......just a sorry and pathetic way of manipulating numbers to convey an illogical point. If you're going to remove the two largest passing drives, it would make sense to also remove the two largest running drives to get a fairer idea of what happened during the rest of the game. So remove the 9 from their only successful drive and 3 from the following drive (yes 3 was the next highest number). So you're left with 23 passes and 9 runs......oh, hey, look at that. Passing on a 71% clip. Gotta be better than that next month.
Get lost, 'Takes. You're just no good at this.
you just don't understand today's NFL if you think running the ball 60% of more of the time is a way to win. some facts below...
only 1 team in over a decade has run the ball even 50% of the time during their season and has won a Super Bowl. The 2013/2014 Seahawks who had a historically good defense. And you want this Eagles team to run something like 65% of the time? Utterly fucking absurd.
only 3 teams in the current playoff race are with 1 percentage point of running it 50% of the time..and you want the Eagles to run it 65% of the time? again utterly fucking absurd.
ONE game, you dummy. We're talking about this week's game with a struggling back up quarterback in cold windy conditions when his receivers could not get open. And I see you have nothing to combat what I said in my last post so you provide bogus, incomplete stats yet again.
Hey, look at this! Here's all of the first place teams and their run pass ratios for clarity:
AVG: 54/46. ----right where I've always suggested winning teams should be. They're actually running more this year than in the last few. You'll notice that the Eagles, who have the best record in the league have a 53/47 ratio. So passing it 65% of the time, with all the other factors I've mentioned, isn't quite the best recipe for their success.
And I know it's shocking to you, but some games dictate that you should run more than pass. Sunday night was one of those nights.
You have nothing. You always have nothing.
edit: eh you're not worth it. have a good day and life.
^ 21 running plays called in the entire game. Would you like to guess how many of them were called during their only sustained drive that resulted in their only touchdown of the game?
NINE.
Nine runs and two passes on their only offensive touchdown scoring drive of the entire game. Almost half of their entire runs in the game on this one drive. N.I.N.E. T.I.M.E.S they ran the ball. 11 plays. 58 yards. Chews up 6 minutes and and 16 seconds of clock. This is the only drive of the game they even resembled the offense we're accustomed to this year. The rest of the game? 11 runs total. Not going to work like that in January.
Clement got two carries and averaged 7 yards a rush. Ajayi is and has always been a volume back. He needs more than just 14 carries a game to be effective. Cold windy night with Folks playing like garbage and the receivers not getting open, this is the kind of game you call 38 runs and 21 passes, not the other way around. Gotta be smarter than that against much better teams next month.
Stick to your shitty St Joes basketball team, 'Takes.
ah when you lose the argument change the argument. Literally the first line you posted was about the percentages of runs to pass. I proved it was bullshit based on the two end of half drives so now you change the argument. Next time lead with the scoring drive that had 9 runs.
i will stick with my Hawks as I always do. Looking forward to conference play.
Oh you're under the assumption this is an argument? That's why you're confused. This isn't an argument. This is one informed fan explaining something to an uninformed person.
They passed the ball too much on a night when the conditions were bad and the back up quarterback was struggling and the receivers were not getting open. Regarding percentages, I put it in bold. I said I would have rather ran 38 times and thrown 21 times. So I don't know what you're talking about, unless you just chose to ignore that part of my post.
Also, as I and others have tried to explain to you countless times over the years, it's not just how many times but WHEN you run. When almost half of your runs come on the only successful drive of the game, logic dictates that it's working and you might want to stick with it. They didn't and almost lost to a bad team who had nothing to play for.
And I ignored your little idea of removing pass plays from two drives thing because it's......just a sorry and pathetic way of manipulating numbers to convey an illogical point. If you're going to remove the two largest passing drives, it would make sense to also remove the two largest running drives to get a fairer idea of what happened during the rest of the game. So remove the 9 from their only successful drive and 3 from the following drive (yes 3 was the next highest number). So you're left with 23 passes and 9 runs......oh, hey, look at that. Passing on a 71% clip. Gotta be better than that next month.
Get lost, 'Takes. You're just no good at this.
you just don't understand today's NFL if you think running the ball 60% of more of the time is a way to win. some facts below...
only 1 team in over a decade has run the ball even 50% of the time during their season and has won a Super Bowl. The 2013/2014 Seahawks who had a historically good defense. And you want this Eagles team to run something like 65% of the time? Utterly fucking absurd.
only 3 teams in the current playoff race are with 1 percentage point of running it 50% of the time..and you want the Eagles to run it 65% of the time? again utterly fucking absurd.
ONE game, you dummy. We're talking about this week's game with a struggling back up quarterback in cold windy conditions when his receivers could not get open. And I see you have nothing to combat what I said in my last post so you provide bogus, incomplete stats yet again.
Hey, look at this! Here's all of the first place teams and their run pass ratios for clarity:
AVG: 54/46. ----right where I've always suggested winning teams should be. They're actually running more this year than in the last few. You'll notice that the Eagles, who have the best record in the league have a 53/47 ratio. So passing it 65% of the time, with all the other factors I've mentioned, isn't quite the best recipe for their success.
And I know it's shocking to you, but some games dictate that you should run more than pass. Sunday night was one of those nights.
You have nothing. You always have nothing.
edit: eh you're not worth it. have a good day and life.
^ 21 running plays called in the entire game. Would you like to guess how many of them were called during their only sustained drive that resulted in their only touchdown of the game?
NINE.
Nine runs and two passes on their only offensive touchdown scoring drive of the entire game. Almost half of their entire runs in the game on this one drive. N.I.N.E. T.I.M.E.S they ran the ball. 11 plays. 58 yards. Chews up 6 minutes and and 16 seconds of clock. This is the only drive of the game they even resembled the offense we're accustomed to this year. The rest of the game? 11 runs total. Not going to work like that in January.
Clement got two carries and averaged 7 yards a rush. Ajayi is and has always been a volume back. He needs more than just 14 carries a game to be effective. Cold windy night with Folks playing like garbage and the receivers not getting open, this is the kind of game you call 38 runs and 21 passes, not the other way around. Gotta be smarter than that against much better teams next month.
Stick to your shitty St Joes basketball team, 'Takes.
ah when you lose the argument change the argument. Literally the first line you posted was about the percentages of runs to pass. I proved it was bullshit based on the two end of half drives so now you change the argument. Next time lead with the scoring drive that had 9 runs.
i will stick with my Hawks as I always do. Looking forward to conference play.
Oh you're under the assumption this is an argument? That's why you're confused. This isn't an argument. This is one informed fan explaining something to an uninformed person.
They passed the ball too much on a night when the conditions were bad and the back up quarterback was struggling and the receivers were not getting open. Regarding percentages, I put it in bold. I said I would have rather ran 38 times and thrown 21 times. So I don't know what you're talking about, unless you just chose to ignore that part of my post.
Also, as I and others have tried to explain to you countless times over the years, it's not just how many times but WHEN you run. When almost half of your runs come on the only successful drive of the game, logic dictates that it's working and you might want to stick with it. They didn't and almost lost to a bad team who had nothing to play for.
And I ignored your little idea of removing pass plays from two drives thing because it's......just a sorry and pathetic way of manipulating numbers to convey an illogical point. If you're going to remove the two largest passing drives, it would make sense to also remove the two largest running drives to get a fairer idea of what happened during the rest of the game. So remove the 9 from their only successful drive and 3 from the following drive (yes 3 was the next highest number). So you're left with 23 passes and 9 runs......oh, hey, look at that. Passing on a 71% clip. Gotta be better than that next month.
Get lost, 'Takes. You're just no good at this.
you just don't understand today's NFL if you think running the ball 60% of more of the time is a way to win. some facts below...
only 1 team in over a decade has run the ball even 50% of the time during their season and has won a Super Bowl. The 2013/2014 Seahawks who had a historically good defense. And you want this Eagles team to run something like 65% of the time? Utterly fucking absurd.
only 3 teams in the current playoff race are with 1 percentage point of running it 50% of the time..and you want the Eagles to run it 65% of the time? again utterly fucking absurd.
ONE game, you dummy. We're talking about this week's game with a struggling back up quarterback in cold windy conditions when his receivers could not get open. And I see you have nothing to combat what I said in my last post so you provide bogus, incomplete stats yet again.
Hey, look at this! Here's all of the first place teams and their run pass ratios for clarity:
AVG: 54/46. ----right where I've always suggested winning teams should be. They're actually running more this year than in the last few. You'll notice that the Eagles, who have the best record in the league have a 53/47 ratio. So passing it 65% of the time, with all the other factors I've mentioned, isn't quite the best recipe for their success.
And I know it's shocking to you, but some games dictate that you should run more than pass. Sunday night was one of those nights.
You have nothing. You always have nothing.
edit: eh you're not worth it. have a good day and life.
^ 21 running plays called in the entire game. Would you like to guess how many of them were called during their only sustained drive that resulted in their only touchdown of the game?
NINE.
Nine runs and two passes on their only offensive touchdown scoring drive of the entire game. Almost half of their entire runs in the game on this one drive. N.I.N.E. T.I.M.E.S they ran the ball. 11 plays. 58 yards. Chews up 6 minutes and and 16 seconds of clock. This is the only drive of the game they even resembled the offense we're accustomed to this year. The rest of the game? 11 runs total. Not going to work like that in January.
Clement got two carries and averaged 7 yards a rush. Ajayi is and has always been a volume back. He needs more than just 14 carries a game to be effective. Cold windy night with Folks playing like garbage and the receivers not getting open, this is the kind of game you call 38 runs and 21 passes, not the other way around. Gotta be smarter than that against much better teams next month.
Stick to your shitty St Joes basketball team, 'Takes.
ah when you lose the argument change the argument. Literally the first line you posted was about the percentages of runs to pass. I proved it was bullshit based on the two end of half drives so now you change the argument. Next time lead with the scoring drive that had 9 runs.
i will stick with my Hawks as I always do. Looking forward to conference play.
Oh you're under the assumption this is an argument? That's why you're confused. This isn't an argument. This is one informed fan explaining something to an uninformed person.
They passed the ball too much on a night when the conditions were bad and the back up quarterback was struggling and the receivers were not getting open. Regarding percentages, I put it in bold. I said I would have rather ran 38 times and thrown 21 times. So I don't know what you're talking about, unless you just chose to ignore that part of my post.
Also, as I and others have tried to explain to you countless times over the years, it's not just how many times but WHEN you run. When almost half of your runs come on the only successful drive of the game, logic dictates that it's working and you might want to stick with it. They didn't and almost lost to a bad team who had nothing to play for.
And I ignored your little idea of removing pass plays from two drives thing because it's......just a sorry and pathetic way of manipulating numbers to convey an illogical point. If you're going to remove the two largest passing drives, it would make sense to also remove the two largest running drives to get a fairer idea of what happened during the rest of the game. So remove the 9 from their only successful drive and 3 from the following drive (yes 3 was the next highest number). So you're left with 23 passes and 9 runs......oh, hey, look at that. Passing on a 71% clip. Gotta be better than that next month.
Get lost, 'Takes. You're just no good at this.
you just don't understand today's NFL if you think running the ball 60% of more of the time is a way to win. some facts below...
only 1 team in over a decade has run the ball even 50% of the time during their season and has won a Super Bowl. The 2013/2014 Seahawks who had a historically good defense. And you want this Eagles team to run something like 65% of the time? Utterly fucking absurd.
only 3 teams in the current playoff race are with 1 percentage point of running it 50% of the time..and you want the Eagles to run it 65% of the time? again utterly fucking absurd.
ONE game, you dummy. We're talking about this week's game with a struggling back up quarterback in cold windy conditions when his receivers could not get open. And I see you have nothing to combat what I said in my last post so you provide bogus, incomplete stats yet again.
Hey, look at this! Here's all of the first place teams and their run pass ratios for clarity:
AVG: 54/46. ----right where I've always suggested winning teams should be. They're actually running more this year than in the last few. You'll notice that the Eagles, who have the best record in the league have a 53/47 ratio. So passing it 65% of the time, with all the other factors I've mentioned, isn't quite the best recipe for their success.
And I know it's shocking to you, but some games dictate that you should run more than pass. Sunday night was one of those nights.
You have nothing. You always have nothing.
edit: eh you're not worth it. have a good day and life.
When presented with the facts, you said “eh you’re not worth it have a nice day.”
Here’s a free tip. If you’re point of view is flimsy, incoherrent, and full of holes, don’t lead off by calling the other person an idiot.
you are an idiot. i mean 8-8 will win division, Eagles should run the ball 65% of the time, Chip Kelly is revolutionizing the game, Dakota Tebow, Pats win because of Steven Ridley, Pats win because of LaGarrette Blount, Chip Kelly is better than Andy Reid, Eagles defense was better than the Giants Super Bowl winning defense, continuing obsessions with taunting 2 time Super Bowl MVP Eli Manning, and possibly best of all, Jimmy Fallon should have stopped Trump's campaign by asking him tough questions. that's just off the top of my head. so either the name fits or you are the funniest comedian since George Carlin died. now deny deny deny....and have a good night
Post edited by pjhawks on
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,248
^ 21 running plays called in the entire game. Would you like to guess how many of them were called during their only sustained drive that resulted in their only touchdown of the game?
NINE.
Nine runs and two passes on their only offensive touchdown scoring drive of the entire game. Almost half of their entire runs in the game on this one drive. N.I.N.E. T.I.M.E.S they ran the ball. 11 plays. 58 yards. Chews up 6 minutes and and 16 seconds of clock. This is the only drive of the game they even resembled the offense we're accustomed to this year. The rest of the game? 11 runs total. Not going to work like that in January.
Clement got two carries and averaged 7 yards a rush. Ajayi is and has always been a volume back. He needs more than just 14 carries a game to be effective. Cold windy night with Folks playing like garbage and the receivers not getting open, this is the kind of game you call 38 runs and 21 passes, not the other way around. Gotta be smarter than that against much better teams next month.
Stick to your shitty St Joes basketball team, 'Takes.
ah when you lose the argument change the argument. Literally the first line you posted was about the percentages of runs to pass. I proved it was bullshit based on the two end of half drives so now you change the argument. Next time lead with the scoring drive that had 9 runs.
i will stick with my Hawks as I always do. Looking forward to conference play.
Oh you're under the assumption this is an argument? That's why you're confused. This isn't an argument. This is one informed fan explaining something to an uninformed person.
They passed the ball too much on a night when the conditions were bad and the back up quarterback was struggling and the receivers were not getting open. Regarding percentages, I put it in bold. I said I would have rather ran 38 times and thrown 21 times. So I don't know what you're talking about, unless you just chose to ignore that part of my post.
Also, as I and others have tried to explain to you countless times over the years, it's not just how many times but WHEN you run. When almost half of your runs come on the only successful drive of the game, logic dictates that it's working and you might want to stick with it. They didn't and almost lost to a bad team who had nothing to play for.
And I ignored your little idea of removing pass plays from two drives thing because it's......just a sorry and pathetic way of manipulating numbers to convey an illogical point. If you're going to remove the two largest passing drives, it would make sense to also remove the two largest running drives to get a fairer idea of what happened during the rest of the game. So remove the 9 from their only successful drive and 3 from the following drive (yes 3 was the next highest number). So you're left with 23 passes and 9 runs......oh, hey, look at that. Passing on a 71% clip. Gotta be better than that next month.
Get lost, 'Takes. You're just no good at this.
you just don't understand today's NFL if you think running the ball 60% of more of the time is a way to win. some facts below...
only 1 team in over a decade has run the ball even 50% of the time during their season and has won a Super Bowl. The 2013/2014 Seahawks who had a historically good defense. And you want this Eagles team to run something like 65% of the time? Utterly fucking absurd.
only 3 teams in the current playoff race are with 1 percentage point of running it 50% of the time..and you want the Eagles to run it 65% of the time? again utterly fucking absurd.
ONE game, you dummy. We're talking about this week's game with a struggling back up quarterback in cold windy conditions when his receivers could not get open. And I see you have nothing to combat what I said in my last post so you provide bogus, incomplete stats yet again.
Hey, look at this! Here's all of the first place teams and their run pass ratios for clarity:
AVG: 54/46. ----right where I've always suggested winning teams should be. They're actually running more this year than in the last few. You'll notice that the Eagles, who have the best record in the league have a 53/47 ratio. So passing it 65% of the time, with all the other factors I've mentioned, isn't quite the best recipe for their success.
And I know it's shocking to you, but some games dictate that you should run more than pass. Sunday night was one of those nights.
You have nothing. You always have nothing.
edit: eh you're not worth it. have a good day and life.
When presented with the facts, you said “eh you’re not worth it have a nice day.”
Here’s a free tip. If you’re point of view is flimsy, incoherrent, and full of holes, don’t lead off by calling the other person an idiot.
you are an idiot. i mean 8-8 will win division, Eagles should run the ball 65% of the time, Chip Kelly is revolutionizing the game, Dakota Tebow, Pats win because of Steven Ridley, Pats win because of LaGarrette Blount, Chip Kelly is better than Andy Reid, Eagles defense was better than the Giants Super Bowl winning defense, continuing obsessions with taunting 2 time Super Bowl MVP Eli Manning, and possibly best of all, Jimmy Fallon should have stopped Trump's campaign by asking him tough questions. that's just off the top of my head. so either the name fits or you are the funniest comedian since George Carlin died. now deny deny deny....and have a good night
totally fucking stupid to play Foles, Ertz, Johnson, Cox and Jenkins even one down. The risk is far greater than the reward. idiotic...and let me guess you think it's ok?
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,248
good call, maybe take them out like in the 4th quarter if they have a big enough lead though
I dunno. Like I said last week, it’s probably smarter to sit them to be safe. Hopefully they look good for a few drives, build a little confidence, and are taken out after a quarter or two.
Sydney Jones is the only real reason to watch this game.
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
0
Options
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,617
Gotta guess it is going to be the Saints - but agree you would rather see the Falcons of the three. Could happen -- Goff could rattle and cough it up.
Prices are fucking crazy....we just got back from the fucking frozen wasteland of Vermont so she is open to waiting to see what the temp looks to be before paying top dollar for good seats.
Sure it is going to be a crazy scene no matter who comes to town.
The love he receives is the love that is saved
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,248
I'm happy it's a Saturday game at least
0
Options
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,617
Yeah - I should have thought about that more and realized it made sense to give the Sat games to the #1 seeds to make sure they had the most possible rest before their next game as part of the advantage
Yeah - I should have thought about that more and realized it made sense to give the Sat games to the #1 seeds to make sure they had the most possible rest before their next game as part of the advantage
I have a feeling that we are the 4:30 Sat game, the worst time slot of the 4 games because we don't have Wentz.
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Yeah - I should have thought about that more and realized it made sense to give the Sat games to the #1 seeds to make sure they had the most possible rest before their next game as part of the advantage
I have a feeling that we are the 4:30 Sat game, the worst time slot of the 4 games because we don't have Wentz.
Ok. I had "because" in there. No way we're in that slot being a #1 seed with a healthy MVP.
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
0
Options
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,617
I think a Saturday slot is the best -- not sure on early or late. Why do you think that is the worst slot? Just curious -- in the end, they will have been off for a week so any of the bye team slots should be good.
I think a Saturday slot is the best -- not sure on early or late. Why do you think that is the worst slot? Just curious -- in the end, they will have been off for a week so any of the bye team slots should be good.
I think that game overall always has the lowest ratings of the 1st 4 games but the networks will actually benefit because its the Eagles playing.
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,248
Probably worst time slot for tv ratings....best for going to though.
Comments
only 1 team in over a decade has run the ball even 50% of the time during their season and has won a Super Bowl. The 2013/2014 Seahawks who had a historically good defense. And you want this Eagles team to run something like 65% of the time? Utterly fucking absurd.
only 3 teams in the current playoff race are with 1 percentage point of running it 50% of the time..and you want the Eagles to run it 65% of the time? again utterly fucking absurd.
Hey, look at this! Here's all of the first place teams and their run pass ratios for clarity:
TEAM: PASS/RUN
PATS: 57/43
PITT: 57/43
JAGS: 49/51
CHIEFS: 57/43
EAGLES: 53/47
VIKINGS: 52/48
SAINTS: 55/45
RAMS: 53/47
AVG: 54/46. ----right where I've always suggested winning teams should be. They're actually running more this year than in the last few. You'll notice that the Eagles, who have the best record in the league have a 53/47 ratio. So passing it 65% of the time, with all the other factors I've mentioned, isn't quite the best recipe for their success.
And I know it's shocking to you, but some games dictate that you should run more than pass. Sunday night was one of those nights.
You have nothing. You always have nothing.
8/28/98- Camden, NJ
10/31/09- Philly
5/21/10- NYC
9/2/12- Philly, PA
7/19/13- Wrigley
10/19/13- Brooklyn, NY
10/21/13- Philly, PA
10/22/13- Philly, PA
10/27/13- Baltimore, MD
Tres Mts.- 3/23/11- Philly
Eddie Vedder- 6/25/11- Philly
Here’s a free tip. If you’re point of view is flimsy, incoherrent, and full of holes, don’t lead off by calling the other person an idiot.
8/28/98- Camden, NJ
10/31/09- Philly
5/21/10- NYC
9/2/12- Philly, PA
7/19/13- Wrigley
10/19/13- Brooklyn, NY
10/21/13- Philly, PA
10/22/13- Philly, PA
10/27/13- Baltimore, MD
Tres Mts.- 3/23/11- Philly
Eddie Vedder- 6/25/11- Philly
Sydney Jones is the only real reason to watch this game.
Go Birds and a happy New Year to you, good sir!
8/28/98- Camden, NJ
10/31/09- Philly
5/21/10- NYC
9/2/12- Philly, PA
7/19/13- Wrigley
10/19/13- Brooklyn, NY
10/21/13- Philly, PA
10/22/13- Philly, PA
10/27/13- Baltimore, MD
Tres Mts.- 3/23/11- Philly
Eddie Vedder- 6/25/11- Philly
Panthers -3.5
Falcons pick'em
Go Falcons
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Could happen -- Goff could rattle and cough it up.
Prices are fucking crazy....we just got back from the fucking frozen wasteland of Vermont so she is open to waiting to see what the temp looks to be before paying top dollar for good seats.
Sure it is going to be a crazy scene no matter who comes to town.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Just curious -- in the end, they will have been off for a week so any of the bye team slots should be good.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer