THE PHILADELPHIA EAGLES...

The Fixer

I don't know how you can blame reid for last year. they had a chance to beat a more talented team and their QB choked.

vick was HORRIBLE in the minnesota game too. andy reid didnt cause him to fumble away a TD or throw multiple passes into coverage. minnesota dropped 8 guys into coverage and vick couldn't read the defense (sound familiar?)

The Juggler

The Fixer wrote:

I don't know how you can blame reid for last year. they had a chance to beat a more talented team and their QB choked.

vick was HORRIBLE in the minnesota game too. andy reid didnt cause him to fumble away a TD or throw multiple passes into coverage. minnesota dropped 8 guys into coverage and vick couldn't read the defense (sound familiar?)

when your qb is going bad, just continue to throw, throw, throw right? :roll: awful. that's what the eagles reverted to towards the end of the year last year. made no sense. vick wasn't playing too well, but his coach didn't do anything to help him. it was not surprising.

and that team was not ready to play that game. biggest game of the year and they didn't show up. first round bye was on the line. 2nd year in a row. at home. as a favorite. didn't show up. no excuse for that.

The Fixer

The Juggler wrote:

The Fixer wrote:

I don't know how you can blame reid for last year. they had a chance to beat a more talented team and their QB choked.

vick was HORRIBLE in the minnesota game too. andy reid didnt cause him to fumble away a TD or throw multiple passes into coverage. minnesota dropped 8 guys into coverage and vick couldn't read the defense (sound familiar?)

when your qb is going bad, just continue to throw, throw, throw right? :roll: awful. that's what the eagles reverted to towards the end of the year last year. made no sense. vick wasn't playing too well, but his coach didn't do anything to help him. it was not surprising.

and that team was not ready to play that game. biggest game of the year and they didn't show up. first round bye was on the line. 2nd year in a row. at home. as a favorite. didn't show up. no excuse for that.

all true. then again, I don't think that team as a whole was very good. the fact that they won 10 games with that defense is nothing short of a miracle

The Juggler

you also said the packers sucked last year (when trying to downplay vick's performance against them when kolb got hurt). they won the super bowl as a 6 seed...an imperfect team with a bunch of injuries who got hot at the right time. the eagles had as good a shot at any in the weak nfc to get to the super bowl last year.

that's why the first round bye was incredibly important for them. instead of that, they ended up having to play the hottest team in the league in the first round.

The Fixer

The Juggler wrote:

you also said the packers sucked last year (when trying to downplay vick's performance against them when kolb got hurt). they won the super bowl as a 6 seed...an imperfect team with a bunch of injuries who got hot at the right time. the eagles had as good a shot at any in the weak nfc to get to the super bowl last year.

that's why the first round bye was incredibly important for them. instead of that, they ended up having to play the hottest team in the league in the first round.

I never said GB sucked. Ask anyone that knows me. I bet them every week last year because I loved them. even laid 2500 on them in the SB

I said vicks performance didn't mean anything because of the defense the pack was playing in the 2nd half. they had a huge lead when vick got into the game.

nice try, bad memory

The Juggler

sorry. you said they weren't that good (in november):

The Fixer wrote:

you talk about the skins beating green bay like that is some tremendous accomplishment. the packers aren't that good.

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=121800&p=3281144&hilit=packers#p3281144

point remains the same though. the nfc was weak last year. birds had a shot and blew it.

RW81233

the Eagles were never good enough to win last year...they are never good enough any year. more seriously they are usually overachieving because of andy reid, only to lose because of any reid.

The Fixer

The Juggler wrote:

sorry. you said they weren't that good (in november):

The Fixer wrote:

you talk about the skins beating green bay like that is some tremendous accomplishment. the packers aren't that good.

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=121800&p=3281144&hilit=packers#p3281144

point remains the same though. the nfc was weak last year. birds had a shot and blew it.

i was talking out of my ass there. I was on GB's nuts all year. Got caught up trying to explain to someone how shitty the skins were :thumbup: . under 7 wins...bang

The Fixer

RW81233 wrote:

the Eagles were never good enough to win last year...they are never good enough any year. more seriously they are usually overachieving because of andy reid, only to lose because of any reid.

Reid didn't cause his QB to grow a vagina in big spots.

It's weird...in the 5 NFC title games mcnabb played in for the birds, his best was the first one. not so coincidentally that was the only one which they weren't favored. the guy just can't handle pressure. some guys can, some guys just can't

The Juggler

The Fixer wrote:

The Juggler wrote:

sorry. you said they weren't that good (in november):

The Fixer wrote:

you talk about the skins beating green bay like that is some tremendous accomplishment. the packers aren't that good.

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=121800&p=3281144&hilit=packers#p3281144

point remains the same though. the nfc was weak last year. birds had a shot and blew it.

i was talking out of my ass there. I was on GB's nuts all year. Got caught up trying to explain to someone how shitty the skins were :thumbup: . under 7 wins...bang

so you're either talking out your ass or your drunk when you say stupid things? got it.


yeah yeah yeah....they finished with 6. big deal, it was close

The Fixer

The Juggler wrote:

so you're either talking out your ass or your drunk when you say stupid things? got it.

pretty much. I'd love to hear your excuse

The Juggler

The Fixer wrote:

RW81233 wrote:

the Eagles were never good enough to win last year...they are never good enough any year. more seriously they are usually overachieving because of andy reid, only to lose because of any reid.

Reid didn't cause his QB to grow a vagina in big spots.

It's weird...in the 5 NFC title games mcnabb played in for the birds, his best was the first one. not so coincidentally that was the only one which they weren't favored. the guy just can't handle pressure. some guys can, some guys just can't

and what have we learned, yet again, this evening?
the exact same thing can be said, and is continuing to be said, of andy reid.

The Juggler

The Fixer wrote:

The Juggler wrote:

so you're either talking out your ass or your drunk when you say stupid things? got it.

pretty much. I'd love to hear your excuse

about what? the pedro feliz thing from 3 years ago? i was just wrong there (actually preferred chone figgins like others in the phils thread--would have been wrong there too).

i'm wrong every few years.

The Fixer

The Juggler wrote:

The Fixer wrote:

RW81233 wrote:

the Eagles were never good enough to win last year...they are never good enough any year. more seriously they are usually overachieving because of andy reid, only to lose because of any reid.

Reid didn't cause his QB to grow a vagina in big spots.

It's weird...in the 5 NFC title games mcnabb played in for the birds, his best was the first one. not so coincidentally that was the only one which they weren't favored. the guy just can't handle pressure. some guys can, some guys just can't

and what have we learned, yet again, this evening?
the exact same thing can be said, and is continuing to be said, of andy reid.

I don't know man. The Arizona game the eagles left a TON of points on the field. I'd blame jim johnson, mcnabb, and akers for that game.

Jim Johnson got ABUSED by todd haley in that one

The Fixer

The Juggler wrote:

The Fixer wrote:

The Juggler wrote:

so you're either talking out your ass or your drunk when you say stupid things? got it.

pretty much. I'd love to hear your excuse

about what? the pedro feliz thing from 3 years ago? i was just wrong there (actually preferred chone figgins like others in the phils thread--would have been wrong there too).

i'm wrong every few years.

ironic that you stopped giving baseball opinions after that

The Juggler

The Fixer wrote:

The Juggler wrote:

The Fixer wrote:

Reid didn't cause his QB to grow a vagina in big spots.

It's weird...in the 5 NFC title games mcnabb played in for the birds, his best was the first one. not so coincidentally that was the only one which they weren't favored. the guy just can't handle pressure. some guys can, some guys just can't

and what have we learned, yet again, this evening?
the exact same thing can be said, and is continuing to be said, of andy reid.

I don't know man. The Arizona game the eagles left a TON of points on the field. I'd blame jim johnson, mcnabb, and akers for that game.

Jim Johnson got ABUSED by todd haley in that one

like i said before, donovan lead them to a huge come back....just couldn't do it twice. had the d done what they were supposed to have done on that late drive, 5 and reid would be looked at a lot differently today. there was a lot of talk leading up to that game about if they made it to the super bowl, would both of them be considered for the hof....oh well.

The Juggler

The Fixer wrote:

The Juggler wrote:

The Fixer wrote:

pretty much. I'd love to hear your excuse

about what? the pedro feliz thing from 3 years ago? i was just wrong there (actually preferred chone figgins like others in the phils thread--would have been wrong there too).

i'm wrong every few years.

ironic that you stopped giving baseball opinions after that

that doesn't make any sense. do you want me to bring up all the dumb things you've said about the phillies this year? been boozing quite a bit there, fixer.

RW81233

yeah but you don't get anywhere close without reid. he really just needs a color coded sheet that tells him when to take time outs, and when not to. i think he's probably on oxycodone during the game and has trouble paying attention. he stays clean for his game plans though.

The Juggler

RW81233 wrote:

yeah but you don't get anywhere close without reid. he really just needs a color coded sheet that tells him when to take time outs, and when not to. i think he's probably on oxycodone during the game and has trouble paying attention. he stays clean for his game plans though.

true.....could be worse. we could have had jason garret, wade phillips, a washed up bill parcels, chan gailey, and a bunch of other dopes patrolling the linc's sidelines over the past 13 years. ZING.

RW81233

I wouldn't hate on Garrett just yet, give it like 8 weeks. But otherwise check, check, check, check, and check. I still think Parcells, T-Glen, and Jason Witten are more to blame for our woes than Tony Romo. Parcells was an idiot and called the stupid WR screen at our own 5. Witten couldn't gain half a yard at Seattle's 1 even though all he had to do was fall forward instead of sideways. Parcells was a bitch and didn't go for the dagger TD from the 1 on 4th down even though M-Barber was basically undefeated at getting that yard that year, and Kris Brown had tagged something like 6 50-yard field goals to carry the Seahawks that year. Then Romo drops the snap. Otherwise he had a pretty nice game against Seattle, put on the best performance of any QB against the Giants during their run, beat the Eagles, and had a terrible game in Minnesota which happens in the NFL when you get down on the road against a good team and your name isn't Brady or Manning.