THE PHILADELPHIA EAGLES...

pjhawks

polaris_x wrote:

i gotta say ... i love philly sports threads ... basically, it's the only threads where people can be insulted, troll and bait people without consequence ... :corn:

for the most part (ok except with one guy) we don't really get personal. we argue though.

The Juggler

pjhawks wrote:

The Juggler wrote:

pjhawks wrote:

the NFL disagrees you on how to calculate their stats. and at least 2 of the vick ruses were designed rushes

and i went through the play-by-play sheets per quarter to get my numbers.

my stats are from espn.
and i'm counting them as passes since you argued they should be counted as passes a year ago in this thread.

bottom line is they were throwing the ball 66-70% of the time with a back up rookie making his nfl debut up until it became a 2 score game.

do you think that gave them the best chance to win?

i agree counting them as rushes is dumb, but i don't make the rules i just follow them

hell our most effective offensive plays were cowboys penalaties (and almost all came on pass plays i might add).

and at no point did i say THIS WEEK that throwing the ball with Foles was the right move. all i was arguing was the general cause and affect of giving mccoy the ball 25 times. as i stated 25 rushes is the affect of the winning, not the cause (not that i'm saying mccoy doesn't affect winning in general, but the number of touches at that level does not).

to say that not giving mccoy 4 more rushes is what cost the team from winning is an unbelievably simplistic and lazy view in my opinion.

well if we are trying to determine the amount of times a running play was called verses a passing play, you should count vick scrambles/sacks as passes. this is one of the few things i actually agreed with you on last year. that's why i counted them as such today. :?

it's not that black and white. you said something earlier about him getting that many carries with a double digit lead. you don't always win games in blowouts dude. the 3 wins this year when he had a lot of carries were decided by a total of 4 points. so if that doesn't make your cause and affect argument null and void, i am not sure what will.

and nobody said mccoy not getting 20 carries was the reason they lost (andy reid has screwed this team up in way too many ways for there only to be one reason). it was just one of the examples of the coaching staff not putting it's team in the best position to win the game (this one stands out so much because mccoy is far and away their best player so it's troublesome he is used so infrequently)...and this has been happening on a weekly basis with this team for years.

Horos

pjhawks wrote:

i agree counting them as rushes is dumb, but i don't make the rules i just follow them

hell our most effective offensive plays were cowboys penalaties (and almost all came on pass plays i might add).

and at no point did i say THIS WEEK that throwing the ball with Foles was the right move. all i was arguing was the general cause and affect of giving mccoy the ball 25 times. as i stated 25 rushes is the affect of the winning, not the cause (not that i'm saying mccoy doesn't affect winning in general, but the number of touches at that level does not).

to say that not giving mccoy 4 more rushes is what cost the team from winning is an unbelievably simplistic and lazy view in my opinion.

You use the word effective but still say cause and affect. :?

pjhawks

Horos wrote:

pjhawks wrote:

i agree counting them as rushes is dumb, but i don't make the rules i just follow them

hell our most effective offensive plays were cowboys penalaties (and almost all came on pass plays i might add).

and at no point did i say THIS WEEK that throwing the ball with Foles was the right move. all i was arguing was the general cause and affect of giving mccoy the ball 25 times. as i stated 25 rushes is the affect of the winning, not the cause (not that i'm saying mccoy doesn't affect winning in general, but the number of touches at that level does not).

to say that not giving mccoy 4 more rushes is what cost the team from winning is an unbelievably simplistic and lazy view in my opinion.

You use the word effective but still say cause and affect. :?

i was away at a basketball tournament when they taught that in grade school. most people have something in grammer or math that screws them up, that affect/effect is the one for me :oops: . never liked english or composition classes. what are going to do?

Horos

pjhawks wrote:

Horos wrote:

pjhawks wrote:

i agree counting them as rushes is dumb, but i don't make the rules i just follow them

hell our most effective offensive plays were cowboys penalaties (and almost all came on pass plays i might add).

and at no point did i say THIS WEEK that throwing the ball with Foles was the right move. all i was arguing was the general cause and affect of giving mccoy the ball 25 times. as i stated 25 rushes is the affect of the winning, not the cause (not that i'm saying mccoy doesn't affect winning in general, but the number of touches at that level does not).

to say that not giving mccoy 4 more rushes is what cost the team from winning is an unbelievably simplistic and lazy view in my opinion.

You use the word effective but still say cause and affect. :?

i was away at a basketball tournament when they taught that in grade school. most people have something in grammer or math that screws them up, that affect/effect is the one for me :oops: . never liked english or composition classes. what are going to do?

I think The Juggler said it first anyway. :corn:

The Juggler

let the foles era commence!

odds are not in the kid's favor. can't name many qb's taken after the 2nd round who went on to have good careers. very few and far between.

here's to him being more tom brady than bobby hoying though! :-o

skins defense is injury riddled and have struggled to get to the qb this year. so this is a decent spot for him to make his first start.

looking forward to watching bob griffin play a full game today too.



oh, and run the ball.


GO BIRDS!

rick1zoo2

Cliffy6745

A fucking dynasty if I have ever seen one

jamminpearls

Talk about NO heart. This team has quit like never before. I can't stand 95% of the players on it. The def is a joke and the pass rush and secondary are non existent. Reid needs to go NOW as well as 3/4 off this pathetic team. How is Vinny Curry not on the field?? We have stiffs on the edge and Curry can't sniff the field. I've never felt like this before about a Philly team. I truly want closure asap. FIRE ANDY!!!!!

The Juggler

the total ineptitude of this team is just comical at this point. from reid to rhodes to kotite to campbell, this is about as bad as it has ever been.

at least when reid took over he was handed a solid nucleus of mike caldwell, brian dawkins, jeremiah trotter, bobby taylor, troy vincent, al harris, chad lewis, hugh douglas, jermaine mayberry, ike reese, duce staley, etc, etc etc....these are the guys who carried this team for the first 4 or 5 years of the reid era.

god bless whoever takes over running this football team. he will be left with scraps.

The Juggler

also, bob griffin the 3rd is a fucking beast. not looking forward to facing him twice a year for the next decade.

eeriepadave

no comment on today's game

The Juggler

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... day-night/

RW81233

On a high note Nick Foles throwing motion is reminiscent of Byron Leftwich's so there's that...

JK_Livin

I didn't get to see much of the game because my son had a game. I got home after the start of the 4th quarter and it was hard to watch. I flicked back and forth with the RedZone. Then I saw Shady down and immediately looked to see how much time was left. Reid and Marty are asolutely clueless right now. My fantasy team never has more wins than the Eagles. This year it does :( :thumbup:

With 3 home games left, what will I do? Maybe put some cardboard cut outs in my seats. Any other ideas?

RW81233

If Reid's son hadn't passed I had a list of jokes for you to fasten to the cardboard cutouts...look at the bright side though. Even though the Eagles haven't made it to the title they have at least won a lot of games in 15 years. Conversely, during that time, the Cowboys have sucked and still have Tony Romo as their starting quarterback.

pjhawks

The Juggler wrote:

the total ineptitude of this team is just comical at this point. from reid to rhodes to kotite to campbell, this is about as bad as it has ever been.

at least when reid took over he was handed a solid nucleus of mike caldwell, brian dawkins, jeremiah trotter, bobby taylor, troy vincent, al harris, chad lewis, hugh douglas, jermaine mayberry, ike reese, duce staley, etc, etc etc....these are the guys who carried this team for the first 4 or 5 years of the reid era.

god bless whoever takes over running this football team. he will be left with scraps.

al harris, mike caldwell, ike reese? really juggler. come on now. ike reese was colt anderson back in the day. mike caldwell was slightly better than akeem jordan. harris sucked here before playing well in green bay

defense when reid took over was better no doubt, but the offensive talent this team will have when next coach takes over will be just as good if not better than that defensive talent you listed.

and a lot of fans, inclunding some here, thought foles couldn't be any worse than vick for this team. they were wrong. not saying foles won't develop into a solid qb but he has not been very good. he missed some open receiver's yesterday. and his turnovers have been even worse than vick.

The Juggler

pjhawks wrote:

The Juggler wrote:

the total ineptitude of this team is just comical at this point. from reid to rhodes to kotite to campbell, this is about as bad as it has ever been.

at least when reid took over he was handed a solid nucleus of mike caldwell, brian dawkins, jeremiah trotter, bobby taylor, troy vincent, al harris, chad lewis, hugh douglas, jermaine mayberry, ike reese, duce staley, etc, etc etc....these are the guys who carried this team for the first 4 or 5 years of the reid era.

god bless whoever takes over running this football team. he will be left with scraps.

al harris, mike caldwell, ike reese? really juggler. come on now. ike reese was colt anderson back in the day. mike caldwell was slightly better than akeem jordan. harris sucked here before playing well in green bay

defense when reid took over was better no doubt, but the offensive talent this team will have when next coach takes over will be just as good if not better than that defensive talent you listed.

and a lot of fans, inclunding some here, thought foles couldn't be any worse than vick for this team. they were wrong. not saying foles won't develop into a solid qb but he has not been very good. he missed some open receiver's yesterday. and his turnovers have been even worse than vick.

mike caldwell might be a stretch but he was solid for a couple years. ike reese was a pro bowler and consistently one of the best special teams player in the league. al harris was a good nickle back in this league for a decade (that's why the packers gave us a 2nd round pick for him). more importantly all 10 or 11 players i listed were not only really good football players, but leaders. i can't name more than 1 or 2 guys on this year's entire roster i would call a leader.

are you saying the offensive talent on this team is as good as the defensive talent on the 98 team? they scored 6 points against a bad defense yesterday. our offense stinks. it's one of the wost in the league. those guys i listed carried us to multiple nfc championship games. i don't think this current crop is capable of the same thing.

pjhawks

The Juggler wrote:

are you saying the offensive talent on this team is as good as the defensive talent on the 98 team? they scored 6 points against a bad defense yesterday. our offense stinks. it's one of the wost in the league. those guys i listed carried us to multiple nfc championship games. i don't think this current crop is capable of the same thing.

talent-wise mccoy, jackson, maclin, celek and jason peters (when healthy) are the equivalent of dawkins, douglas, vincent, trotter, and taylor.

they scored 6 points yesterday because they have no offensive line and no qb and because they've quit on the coach because they know he is a lame duck.

i know a good portion of the fan base wanted foles over vick. ain't amazing how a backup qb in philly goes from sainthood to no good so quickly :?

The Juggler

pjhawks wrote:

The Juggler wrote:

are you saying the offensive talent on this team is as good as the defensive talent on the 98 team? they scored 6 points against a bad defense yesterday. our offense stinks. it's one of the wost in the league. those guys i listed carried us to multiple nfc championship games. i don't think this current crop is capable of the same thing.

talent-wise mccoy, jackson, maclin, celek and jason peters (when healthy) are the equivalent of dawkins, douglas, vincent, trotter, and taylor.

they scored 6 points yesterday because they have no offensive line and no qb and because they've quit on the coach because they know he is a lame duck.

i know a good portion of the fan base wanted foles over vick. ain't amazing how a backup qb in philly goes from sainthood to no good so quickly :?

jason peters may never be the same again after missing a whole year. that's a debilitating injury. brent celek is on par with guys like dawk and trotter? no way. he's a decent player. he also leads the team in dropped passes. chad lewis was better than brent celek. jeremy maclin? maclin's in contract year. i'm not sure he's even back next year. jackson is great at stretching the field but he's not on par leadership wise with any of those guys from the early days.

mccoy's the only one, talent wise i would agree with you with. dawkins is a future hall of famer. everyone else back then was consistently one of the best at their positions for multiple years. cant' say that about anyone but mccoy and peters, who again, you cannot count on next year.